What's a good compromise between a Coastal Cruiser and a Bluewater cruiser?

[Vitis01]

Hi jsal,


It sounds like my wife and I are only a few months ahead of you in our similar dreaming. We only passed our ASA 101 class last month and we are scheduled for ASA 103 at the beginning of April. We joined a cheap club (~$200/mo. unlimited sailing) and sail every weekend on little 25 ft Capris.


Of course, I've been armchair sailing on Yachtworld and YouTube and vicariously through John Kretchmer's and other's writing for almost 2 years. I struggled pointlessly with the Coastal/Blue Water question for those 2 years until we got on the water and saw some other boats up close.


The Coastal/Blue Water distinction is a really fun exercise to motivate you to look at boats in a deeper way. Combing through SailboatData.com trying to make sense of SA/Disp and Displacement/Length ratios is still a great waste of an evening for me.



BUT (TL;DR starts here)
Even after just a little sailing I realize that most boats out there are recognized and reliable brands. There just aren't enough people buying boats for a crap brand to last very long. And the range of boats that you can purchase are mostly just a choice of of what kind of adventure will you end up having. Different boats will make you sail differently and make different choices. I think that some of these choices I will be able to anticipate but I suspect that many (maybe even most) I won't and that will be part of the fun.

Cheers,
Matt and Liz

[Joh.Ghurt]

Originally Posted by Vitis01

I struggled pointlessly with the Coastal/Blue Water question for those 2 years until we got on the water and saw some other boats up close

Mat,

many people (me included) idolise the blue-water boats as being the pinnacle.

However, what most people miss, is that there's a price to pay for this. If you need that feature, you'll have to pay it, but if you intend to mostly coastal cruising with an occasional longer passage to get there - like crossing into the Caribbean, jumping to the Balearics, then you get a lot more from a coastal cruiser for your money than going blue-water.

And if you're really set to cross the Atlantic once, this also can be done on surprisingly small boats with a little preparation and training. On the other hand, if you want to do this twice a year, you're better served with a true Blue-Water cruiser.

The sooner you have a good understanding where and how you'd want to sail instead of wanting to be prepared for anything, the better you can shop for a boat that supports those plans best.

[Buzzman]

Originally Posted by KP44

On the old windjammers and whaling ships when they gave out a tot of rum to the crew, it was called, "Splicing the main-brace."

The main-brace is the strongest part of the ship. It is the crew that holds it together and sails the ship.

While I don't disagree with the sentiment, the "main brace" on old square-rigged sailing ships was the largest diameter line on the ship, and was effectively a backstay for the mainmast.

It was an absolute bugger to splice if it needed a new eye or join, but was absolutely required as otherwise the mainmast could fall.

So it was always an urgent "do it NOW" job, and was filthy (large diameter rope, messy, hairy hemp rope fibres) and so was not a well-liked job.

So the ship's captain would offer a tot of rum to those doing the job to speed it up and get it done.

Thence the expression "And a tot of rum for those who splice the main brace" eventually was abbreviated to simply "Splice the man brace" meaning a "tot of rum" whenever such was offered by the captain, usually after some arduous task or action.

[argonauta1]

Just look at the charter fleets around the world and choose one of those models. They are all built to take abuse which is what is needed. Stay away from the prima donna options unless you want to spend more money than you need to. None are Bluewater equipped but they are all capable when properly equipped.

[DMF Sailing]

Originally Posted by Buzzman

While I don't disagree with the sentiment, the "main brace" on old square-rigged sailing ships was the largest diameter line on the ship, and was effectively a backstay for the mainmast.

It was an absolute bugger to splice if it needed a new eye or join, but was absolutely required as otherwise the mainmast could fall.

So it was always an urgent "do it NOW" job, and was filthy (large diameter rope, messy, hairy hemp rope fibres) and so was not a well-liked job.

So the ship's captain would offer a tot of rum to those doing the job to speed it up and get it done.

Thence the expression "And a tot of rum for those who splice the main brace" eventually was abbreviated to simply "Splice the man brace" meaning a "tot of rum" whenever such was offered by the captain, usually after some arduous task or action.

I can confirm this from reading C. S. Forester and Dewey Lambdin novels

[TrentePieds]

Re #48 and # 50:

Well, not quite!

A square rigger controlled the angular setting of the yards in relation to the centreline of the ship by means of "braces". Doing so was analogous to our "sheeting" of a fore'n'after. Every yard had a port and a starboard brace, and these braces were lead via blocks to belaying pins at defined places in the ship so that every square rigger in the world had the same pattern. Thus the expression "knowing the ropes". A sailor - by the time he shipped out as an "OS" (ordinary seaman) - would know precisely where to find a given brace, and any other "rope" in the ship, regardless of what ship he was in. As ships grew so big that the force required to trim the braces grew beyond the ability of even the stoutest crew to do so in any kind of "weather", and as crews for economic reasons grew ever smaller, ships were fitted with the famous (notorious) "Jarvis Brace Winch".

Braces have NOTHING to do with the staying of the masts.

But square riggers also had sheets. From the lower tops'l up, these were lines taken from the clews of the given sail to the yardarm of the sail immediately below. By virtue of the decreasing width of sails as you go aloft, the sheets served both as outhauls and as downhauls. Thus when "sheeted tight" the whole sequence of sails on a given mast functioned as one single sail, but it was necessary to pay attention to the proper trimming of the successive braces. The sheets from the fores'l, the mains'l and the cro'jack were taken to the rails of the ship, the sails being cut to account for the ship's breadth "at the rails" being less that the length of the relevant yards.

We have some ex-USCG people among us. If any have served in USCG Eagle They can confirm the above.

TrentePieds

[DMF Sailing]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

Re #48 and # 50:

Well, not quite!

A square rigger controlled the angular setting of the yards in relation to the centreline of the ship by means of "braces". Doing so was analogous to our "sheeting" of a fore'n'after. Every yard had a port and a starboard brace, and these braces were lead via blocks to belaying pins at defined places in the ship so that every square rigger in the world had the same pattern. Thus the expression "knowing the ropes". A sailor - by the time he shipped out as an "OS" (ordinary seaman) - would know precisely where to find a given brace, and any other "rope" in the ship, regardless of what ship he was in. As ships grew so big that the force required to trim the braces grew beyond the ability of even the stoutest crew to do so in any kind of "weather", and as crews for economic reasons grew ever smaller, ships were fitted with the famous (notorious) "Jarvis Brace Winch".

Braces have NOTHING to do with the staying of the masts.

But square riggers also had sheets. From the lower tops'l up, these were lines taken from the clews of the given sail to the yardarm of the sail immediately below. By virtue of the decreasing width of sails as you go aloft, the sheets served both as outhauls and as downhauls. Thus when "sheeted tight" the whole sequence of sails on a given mast functioned as one single sail, but it was necessary to pay attention to the proper trimming of the successive braces. The sheets from the fores'l, the mains'l and the cro'jack were taken to the rails of the ship, the sails being cut to account for the ship's breadth "at the rails" being less that the length of the relevant yards.

We have some ex-USCG people among us. If any have served in USCG Eagle They can confirm the above.

TrentePieds

30' I'm just talking about the drinking. As square-rigged ships go, that's my only area of expertise.

[TrentePieds]

@DMF:

No Prob :-)!

Not many yotties about any more who'd even know a ship if they saw one. USCG Eagle is not a ship, BTW. She is a barque. Formerly she was the German training vessel Horst Wessel. She was taken by the US from the Germans at the end of WWII as "reparations". She never saw service under the flag of the Third Reich, having been barely completed at war's end.

There are various other kinds of square rigged vessels going by sundry names. All of them have rigs that differ from the rig that makes a vessel a "ship"

"Splicing the main brace" was never more that slang for the act of having an extra, specially authorized, celebratory tot in addition to the standard "daily issue" of rum. A master of a naval sailing vessel could not issue an order to "slice the main brace", neither could the senior officer aboard even if he bore the rank of Captain. It took an Admiral to do that!

In TP the only braces are those holding up me trews, though I dearly wish I could sling a yard for a course and raffee, thus eliminating the hassle of a spinnaker. :-)

Cheers

TP

[DMF Sailing]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

@DMF:

No Prob :-)!

Not many yotties about any more who'd even know a ship if they saw one. USCG Eagle is not a ship, BTW. She is a barque. Formerly she was the German training vessel Horst Wessel. She was taken by the US from the Germans at the end of WWII as "reparations". She never saw service under the flag of the Third Reich, having been barely completed at war's end.

There are various other kinds of square rigged vessels going by sundry names. All of them have rigs that differ from the rig that makes a vessel a "ship"

"Splicing the main brace" was never more that slang for the act of having an extra, specially authorized, celebratory tot in addition to the standard "daily issue" of rum. A master of a naval sailing vessel could not issue an order to "slice the main brace", neither could the senior officer aboard even if he bore the rank of Captain. It took an Admiral to do that!

In TP the only braces are those holding up me trews, though I dearly wish I could sling a yard for a course and raffee, thus eliminating the hassle of a spinnaker. :-)

Cheers

TP

Actually, I did know that!

Eagle was in Boston a few years ago, so I read up on her (and buzzed her a few times whilst taking pictures from a Soling 27...I'm sure the Coasties appreciated that. )

I'm constantly correcting people here who call the U.S.S. Constitution a "ship." She is a frigate, being of 44 guns, though a stout one; she was armed with 24-pounders, which is why she was able to defeat the British frigates (a 32 and a 38 a believe) in one-on-one combat! But fast enough to elude a true ship-of-the-line.

I never had the pleasure of sailing on a ship, but I did once sail a barquentine. She clears the Bourne Bridge with at least five feet to spare, I'm happy to say, having seen it.