Crew Wanted: Norfolk to Bahamas

[Alex_V]

So, you are in a narrow ICW canal with strong head wind. No motor. You just sit there for hours or days middle of the canal on anchor? And then you see a barge coming your way... Good times would follow.

I am far from being an expert here. It was my first time sailing a new to me Sabre 34 from Annapolis to Wilmington this summer. There is no way I could off done this without a motor, and a good chart plotter.

Perhaps an expert sailer could do ICW motor-less, or go offshore into the graveyard and succeed. But I would not take such risk. Your mileage may vary.

My .02

[rockDAWG]

Originally Posted by mjscottinnc

This asks an interesting question, which is correct?
Boat_alexandra says he has sailed up and down the Atlantic ICW without mechanical propulsion no problem. While others are equally as adamant that it is prohibited.

Which is right?

Is it up to the bridge tender? State law? Federal Statute? Has boat_alexandra just been lucky?

I'd like to know what is real and put this to bed once and for all!

I have seen kayaks go thro lock, they going in last and come out last. But kayak is fast more agile than the 15 ton sailing vessel of the OP.

[SuW]

Originally Posted by rockDAWG

I have seen kayaks go thro lock, they going in last and come out last. But kayak is fast more agile than the 15 ton sailing vessel of the OP.

Under sail going downstream with a failed motor trying to get to Ortega River marina for repairs. We had our dinghy with 3hp outboard doing a hip tow in very light wind. A bridge operator on the St. Johns river refused our passage. We had to call Sea Tow. We wouldn't have made it through the Ortega River bridge either.

Locks on the St. Lawrence refuse human-powered or sail only vessels. We had to carry our rowing eight around!

YMMV.

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by Lnewman

They should not be asking for passengers.

He shouldn't be asking for passengers at all without a Master's license. Crew is a different matter.

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

This is not correct. I sailed through everywhere, no problem.

There are a few places I know for sure sailing is not permitted. The C&D Canal is one - it's on the charts. I recall many drawbridges are the same. I don't have notes with me and honestly don't want to plow my way through the charts for the ICW finding the notes. That someone got away with it doesn't change the rules.



I called to a bridge when I lost the engine on a delivery (sorry I don't remember the bridge - there are too many) and was told I couldn't sail through. I explained my situation. That led to an exchange along these lines:


BRIDGE: You may not sail through.
DAVE: I'm kind of stuck, sir. There are no services between this bridge and the last one and our engine has failed.
BRIDGE: Are you declaring an emergency?
DAVE: It isn't really an emergency, sir. We're all fine. We just don't have a working engine.
BRIDGE: Son, I don't think you understand my question. Are you declaring an emergency?
DAVE: Yes sir. We have a bit of an emergency here. Our engine has failed and we can only proceed under sail.
BRIDGE: Okay sir that's fine. You don't have to wait for the top of the hour - I'll open for you as soon as you get close.

DAVE: Thank you bridge.


Maybe it just pays to be polite to people.

[seandepagnier]

They also refused electric propulsion in the cape cod canal, because they like to make up new rules on the spot. They decided it was better I tack 20 times against wind and tide and retreat the way I came than continue sailing dead downwind with favorable tide making 7 knots over ground.

So whatever the rule, is not important. If there is someone going to physically stop you or not, and this has nothing to do with the rules.

When I sailed under bridges or go through locks, I didn't mention anything about sail power. This is the preferred way to power a boat. I just ask to open it, and that's never been a problem.

The rule of not allowing sail or human power is made by people who don't know very much about what they are doing. These same people think it's ok to use a motor, and break down half way, or even tow a boat through, which is also ok, even if that one motor breaks, and now two boats are adrift without control.

But it's all ok because they tried to do things the way that someone who doesn't know how to do things would do them. Instead of waiting for optimal wind and tide, and having reliable power that is also a lot more interesting for the people on the bridge to watch.

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by Alex_V

So, you are in a narrow ICW canal with strong head wind. No motor. You just sit there for hours or days middle of the canal on anchor?

I never tried anchoring in the middle of the canal where barges pass what made you think of doing that?

I anchor in a place to the side that is not in the canal like everyone else. Most of the ICW is wide enough to tack if there is headwind. If it truly isn't and the wind turns on you (bad planning mostly) you can sail back (backtrack) to a place to anchor and wait for favorable wind.

And then you see a barge coming your way... Good times would follow.

I am far from being an expert here. It was my first time sailing a new to me Sabre 34 from Annapolis to Wilmington this summer. There is no way I could off done this without a motor, and a good chart plotter.

If you follow what I wrote above, you should realize that you could do without a motor.

If you still disagree, most likely it is because you are being stubborn, "set in your ways" and don't care or consider the pollution burden you place on everyone else. The arguments for motors basically amount to this.

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

They also refused electric propulsion in the cape cod canal, because they like to make up new rules on the spot. They decided it was better I tack 20 times against wind and tide and retreat the way I came than continue sailing dead downwind with favorable tide making 7 knots over ground.

So whatever the rule, is not important. If there is someone going to physically stop you or not, and this has nothing to do with the rules.

When I sailed under bridges or go through locks, I didn't mention anything about sail power. This is the preferred way to power a boat. I just ask to open it, and that's never been a problem.

The rule of not allowing sail or human power is made by people who don't know very much about what they are doing. These same people think it's ok to use a motor, and break down half way, or even tow a boat through, which is also ok, even if that one motor breaks, and now two boats are adrift without control.

But it's all ok because they tried to do things the way that someone who doesn't know how to do things would do them. Instead of waiting for optimal wind and tide, and having reliable power that is also a lot more interesting for the people on the bridge to watch.

You know I’ve really come around to your particular mode of cruising. A nice environmental statement as well.

I will keep an engine as my life is not one where time is unlimited right now. But my boat sails really well in all breeze including light air and I enjoy sailing into harbors and on/off anchor

And it’s really important to note that it’s tougher to scale up inland cruising without an engine much bigger than your boat, and certainly not with a relatively slow upwind boat like the OP’s.

[mjscottinnc]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

They also refused electric propulsion in the cape cod canal, because they like to make up new rules on the spot. They decided it was better I tack 20 times against wind and tide and retreat the way I came than continue sailing dead downwind with favorable tide making 7 knots over ground.

So whatever the rule, is not important. If there is someone going to physically stop you or not, and this has nothing to do with the rules.

When I sailed under bridges or go through locks, I didn't mention anything about sail power. This is the preferred way to power a boat. I just ask to open it, and that's never been a problem.

The rule of not allowing sail or human power is made by people who don't know very much about what they are doing. These same people think it's ok to use a motor, and break down half way, or even tow a boat through, which is also ok, even if that one motor breaks, and now two boats are adrift without control.

But it's all ok because they tried to do things the way that someone who doesn't know how to do things would do them. Instead of waiting for optimal wind and tide, and having reliable power that is also a lot more interesting for the people on the bridge to watch.

Ah, I see now. Thank you for clearing things up.

So basically both statements are correct. You travel the ICW anywhere you wish, whether it's prohibited or not. Yep, I see.

[puffcard]

I've sailed two boats engineless for a few years out of a marina. They were both under 4,000 lbs, great sailing, and very agile. I wouldn't sail an OI 33 in tight quarters with light winds. Good luck to you.

[Jimmy4]

Just because one other guy, with tons of experience (and yes, luck) does something highly risky, freezing cold and survives does NOT mean it is safe or smart. They do make electric motors and even electric outboards just in case. North Atlantic in Winter is exactly as others have stated ... risky. Good luck ... don’t take more risk than you are willing to lose. Biggest part of sailing is planning for a safe voyage. By the way ... we sailors with motors have lives that we cherish and we believe in a reasonable backup. Morgan OI and a sculling oar sounds like a heavy ride to be pushing by hand. Think twice ... YOLO

[mjscottinnc]

I owe boat_alexandra an apology...

He seems like a smart and articulate guy, his ways are different then most, but he alway seems knowledgeable when he has responded.

I just had to find absolute proof that 'unpowered' or 'human powered' vessels are prohibited from transiting locks and bridges on the Atlantic ICW as so many have stated here.

I looked over the NOAA charts and searched online for something that would prove it's not allowed.

I've found nothing, the only restriction I can find is the requirement that unpowered vessels not restrict boat traffic in narrow waterways.

Sorry I made the assumption you were wrong.

[seandepagnier]

Just transited 4 bridges and a lock today. I sailed close hulled under bridges, luffing when the wind is blocked, and catch it on the other side.

So it's possible to sail under bridge with wind from any angle.

Now I saw several other boats go, and none even tried to sail even though mostly was a reach. When they pass me I have to hold my breath to avoid breathing their fumes.

Is it rude to use engine and whoever you pass put cancer in their lungs when wind is actually fine to use and you have sail? They have roller furling, so easy! but they don't even use it why?


A few boats made big cloud of pollution too. Why is this allowed by boats? Aren't cars required to pass emissions why not boats?

[kmacdonald]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

Just transited 4 bridges and a lock today. I sailed close hulled under bridges, luffing when the wind is blocked, and catch it on the other side.

So it's possible to sail under bridge with wind from any angle.

Now I saw several other boats go, and none even tried to sail even though mostly was a reach. When they pass me I have to hold my breath to avoid breathing their fumes.

Is it rude to use engine and whoever you pass put cancer in their lungs when wind is actually fine to use and you have sail? They have roller furling, so easy! but they don't even use it why?


A few boats made big cloud of pollution too. Why is this allowed by boats? Aren't cars required to pass emissions why not boats?

I for one am sorry for spewing carcinogens down your lungs. I'm sure there are other smokes more to your liking.

[KeelMe]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

Just transited 4 bridges and a lock today. I sailed close hulled under bridges, luffing when the wind is blocked, and catch it on the other side.

So it's possible to sail under bridge with wind from any angle.

Now I saw several other boats go, and none even tried to sail even though mostly was a reach. When they pass me I have to hold my breath to avoid breathing their fumes.

Is it rude to use engine and whoever you pass put cancer in their lungs when wind is actually fine to use and you have sail? They have roller furling, so easy! but they don't even use it why?


A few boats made big cloud of pollution too. Why is this allowed by boats? Aren't cars required to pass emissions why not boats?

A few days ago the wind at my marina was coming from the NE. There is a big power boat across the dock from me to the NE. He never runs his motors but he decided to that day. I sucked on his diesel fumes for about 5 minutes before I got up and started beating on his hull. He climbed down and offered me a beer. I told him the wind was out of the NE and I am SW of him sucking all his fumes. He sprinted back up to the flybridge and shut her down. The next day there was a case of San Pellegrino on my boarding ladder.

[mjscottinnc]

Seems like it might be time to continue this new conversation on a thread of its own. Way off the original question.