Bluewater Boats

[zeehag]

westsail 32 survived perfect storm--ye think it could be a blue water cruiser?? lol..my boat has a 2 inch minimum thickness of hull. came from taiwan. survived a few times being slammed into a jetty, broadside---ye think it could withstand blue water?? there are many like mine in blue water. there are many boats that are seaworthy--many boats one can safely sail around the world onboard-----one that DID sail around the world was a 27 catalina--they did this in 1990 or so--granted the boat was beefed up a bit--the name was my sweet lord--i am sure they used that as a mantra as they sailed. our opinions are just that--opinions---there are as many as a**holes in this world----so--what connotes bluewater cruiser?? isnt that a subjective statement /question that only the sailor can answer??--all we can do is verbalize our own personal preferences.......by the way--spray is a beamy boat at 14 ft---mine is also beamy at 12 ft to 12.5 ft. westsail 32 is only 32 ft but survived the perfect storm.....

[Ex-Calif]

Coupe of clarification from me -

Rigging size - I didn't mean to suggest that you just replace the rigging with a larger size. As someone suggested, it's the system I am interested in. For teh same LOA a "havier rig has strength and longevity. This about an ocean race boat where it is joked that the rig should fall down after the finish gun sounds. In other words I'd like overbuilt.

Flare - I am not suggesting sportfisher flare but rather "classic flare."

Cockpit - I agree with smaller, protected and resistant to swamping.

Displacement - Yes the boat goes slower but when the stuff hits the fan I'd rather be at sea anchor bow to weather, steadying sail up and sleeping below decks. I see the tend for ocean racers (the Volvos) to have an open transom, vertical stem and no flare. I think that would be brutal to "plan" for the water to come across the deck, swamp me and the cockpit and drain out the back. No thanks...

[rtbates]

A Cape Dory, any Cape Dory except maybe the 19' Typhoon or the George Stadel designed 25, with the outboard. I've sailed my 25D, with the diesel, in conditions, 40+, that larger boats dropped sail and motored back to their slip..

[osirissail]

- - For "over-built" boats you have to look back 10 to 20 years or more. When the mathematics of stress analysis and materials strength was a nice idea but without computers it was just too risky. So they built the boats "over-strength" to err on the safe side. New boats are computer engineered to 20 decimal places to save money and time building them.
- - You see state of the art ocean racers break in half and new material/techniques hulls delaminate and fracture. But these are the "test boats" designed to push the limits in the name of weight reduction and speed. They are a good place to find out what design/construction techniques you do not want. Same with rigging and rigging equipment like furlers. If the equipment holds up in these punishing conditions of high speed southern ocean racing then that would probably be a good recommendation for your use.
- - I know Steve Dashew believes in building for speed as a major safety factor. Being able to outrun or divert away from bad weather/seas is one option - albeit a rather expensive option to purchase. Just having a longer waterline versus a shorter waterline on small boats increases your ability to outrun or divert from bad weather.
- - But for "budget cruisers" our choices are more in the traditional arena of heavy solid and as a result "slow" boats. As I mentioned in another thread about power yachts, power yachts can achieve up to double the speed and they will crash and bash for half the time of the slower sturdy sailboat with the better ride. So that is a personal and monetary decision - more pain for shorter time or less pain over a longer time.
- - Open ocean, high latitude sailing is really asking for punishment both for the boat and the crew. I would suggest going old with solid serious "over-built" vessels and accept the slow speed along with the better ride. The faster more nimble boats don't get there any faster on average. During a sail back north to Florida I met a 28 footer with a single-hander who averaged 4 kts to my 8 kt 50 footer. He did not need an autopilot as the full keel heavy little boat would only go straight unless significant effort was used to turn it. He could and did just sail along merrily in big seas while I was hiding in a harbor waiting for better weather. From the USVI to Florida he beat me. The old story of the turtle and hare.
- - So the suggestions for the older solid double enders is valuable information if you want to arrive with only a few body bruises. It is a "style" choice. If you can take a beating and heal fast then the faster, more nimble boats are more exciting.
- - Specifically for high latitude sailing there are "ice, icebergs and snow" problems to consider. A metal hull normally can survive such encounters better than FRG which gets brittle and will not take a "dent" like metal. Buying old steel is fraught with dangers so new steel or carefully chosen old steel from a obsessive compulsive owner who kept everything clean and dry is the way to go. And for FRG hulls here again the old, over-built boats excel over the thin, high-tech newer hulls.
- - Relying on sea anchors should not be a consideration - keeping the boat moving slow but steady under control is, IMHO, much safer. You will get very little or no sleep hanging to a sea anchor with the bow pitching and diving over the big waves. Big enough waves and you will over-run the sea anchor with serious problems. Heaving-to is possible but with North Atlantic seas which can run 2 to 3 times your boat length, staying under control moving forward allows some measure of safety than being totally at the random mercy of Mother Nature.
- - Ocean racers are built for speed which as Steve Dashew says a plumb bow provides easier. Open transoms are a weight issue - one, less FRG and two, boarding water drains much faster.

[sneuman]

- - I know Steve Dashew believes in building for speed as a major safety factor. Being able to outrun or divert away from bad weather/seas is one option - albeit a rather expensive option to purchase. Just having a longer waterline versus a shorter waterline on small boats increases your ability to outrun or divert from bad weather.

My personal opinion (as in IMHO) is that outrunning weather is more myth than reality, regardless of speed within cruising parameters. I'm not saying it doesn't happen sometimes. There was a thread on this topic some time ago (I can't seem to find it now) and the consensus was that no one (mono or multi) could give an example of having "outrun bad weather" on an offshore passage.

Someone is sure to come out of the woodwork to challenge this post, but we should keep in mind that that person is very probably the exception to the rule.

- Relying on sea anchors should not be a consideration - keeping the boat moving slow but steady under control is, IMHO, much safer. You will get very little or no sleep hanging to a sea anchor with the bow pitching and diving over the big waves. Big enough waves and you will over-run the sea anchor with serious problems. Heaving-to is possible but with North Atlantic seas which can run 2 to 3 times your boat length, staying under control moving forward allows some measure of safety than being totally at the random mercy of Mother Nature.

This, of course, presupposes adequate sea room. Without it, heaving to or hanging to a sea anchor may be the smartest choice.

[hellosailor]

"- - Ocean racers are built for speed which as Steve Dashew says a plumb bow provides easier."
Surely that's the abridged version.<G> On boats somewhat smaller than the Sundeers, i.e. in the 24-38' range, I've found that a plumb bow is only suitable for a "lake boat". Take a nice plumb bow like a J/24 out into a two foot chop, and all you do is pound-stop-start-pound-repeat as that plumbbow cannot ride up over any kind of choppy water, and instead acts as a very effective brake.
Big racers with enough momentum (and strong-kidneyed crew) might be able to break right through that, but I prefer a hull that is somewhat more ladylike about rising over the crowd instead of elbowing through them.

[Cheechako]

"lol..my boat has a 2 inch minimum thickness of hull. came from taiwan.."
Surely you jest? Seen many Taiwanese boats and they are generally built stout for sure (the phrase that comes to mind is : "what they lack in knowhow they make up for with more glass") Never seen anything near 2" though.... even up to 51 feet...

[barnakiel]

Someone above asked if we know anybody changing their standing rigging every 10 years or so. Yes I have (actually more often than this). And I do believe it is necessary, if your cruising habits take you to places where no rigger is available.

My thinking is that if the shroud or stay goes then the stick will follow. And it is not so much the age by itself but rather the number of cycles of stress. And if you mostly cross oceans then it is a huge number. Thus, I replace.

b.

[First Mate]

yeap. same with chain plates I hear (in response to another post above regarding xraying chain plates). And testing labs do indeed have mobile xray capabilities. they do it all the time on steel buildings under construction on the welds and under plenty of other conditions.

some boats' chain plates are exposed but other boats have chainplates that are buried in the fiberglass (most unfortunate $$ condition for replacement). Even under the fiberglass, the xray technician can see the metal. The fiberglass does not block xrays. They can tell you what percentage of allowable number cycles of stress have been used already.

Originally Posted by barnakiel

Someone above asked if we know anybody changing their standing rigging every 10 years or so. Yes I have (actually more often than this). And I do believe it is necessary, if your cruising habits take you to places where no rigger is available.

My thinking is that if the shroud or stay goes then the stick will follow. And it is not so much the age by itself but rather the number of cycles of stress. And if you mostly cross oceans then it is a huge number. Thus, I replace.

b.

[Cheechako]

An xray should be able to show if there are any corroded away parts to the metal due to the density of the parent material vs the corrosion. In addition it should be able to show any cracks if he can get the shot right. I dont know of any way an x ray can predict how many "cycles" have occurred to determine the risk of cycle fatigue though. (unless it is cracked!) The problem may be getting at the chainplate area to get a proper shot and reading. The most likely place for corrosive problems is at the top surface of the deck and down where the deck core etc is I would imagine.... pretty hard to get a good shot there I would think... He needs the isotope on one side and teh film on the other....

[aspiringsailor]

ok. yeah. i get the whole stress thing, and it is definitely variable. but my thought is, say you go and spend the cash to have whatever xrayed to tell you the stress cycles blah blah. so what is the stress cycle? how is it determined? I would tend to think that you dont really know. you could spend most of your time in light to moderate winds, but say you encounter heavy winds all the time, in the heavy winds you are going to go through the "stress cycles" a lot faster. Thats probably why a time frame has been suggested. but thats what it is, a suggestion. you dont have to take it.

“Why do so many just keep going on with these things? If you are going to keep worrying so much it is time to find a new "sport" or you better win the lottery or something!”

and just because people are talking about something you dont have to jump in and be rude because you have heard it before. you dont have to read it in the first place. this is a forum, most people come to forums to learn and ask questions.

[barnakiel]

Argh ... ;-))) Okay - so:

1) if we know how old the plates are / the rig is - we visually check it, clean it, test for cracks and carry on (hopefully sailing),
2) if we do not know how old the rig is, unless we will be sailing mostly from our berth to the fuel dock, - we do the same and then replace if anything found guilty,

On the other hand, I am a scary cat, I sail mostly long ocean passages and often to off the beaten track destinations, and I have seen more boats disabled by dismasting than by any other reason. So I try to replace pieces of my rigging before they can break.

Off course, for other skippers / itineraries it will be different.

b.

[Ex-Calif]

Originally Posted by hellosailor

Take a nice plumb bow like a J/24 out into a two foot chop, and all you do is pound-stop-start-pound-repeat as that plumbbow cannot ride up over any kind of choppy water, and instead acts as a very effective brake.

I am not sure I woud characterize the J24 as plumb bowed. It's not even fine entried. I will say that in 2 foot chop I would much rather be "cruising" on my relatively 2 X heavier maxi (26 foot) than the J24. Wouldn't want to spill the wine

Regards x-ray. You know it's cracked or not. If not cracked then the question is propogation rates. You want a propogation rate longer than the time between inspections vs. time to failure otherwise you are just guessing. Chain plate materials should provide this assurance.

To determine stress you need techniques beyond the ken of the average owner skipper.

[ka4wja]

aspiringsailor,
I do appreciate your efforts here, I truly do......but I steer clear of these threads since they typically evolve into ego-fests, a frustrating series of comments on the minutia and symantics, as well as a concoction of "I'm right, you're wrong"-type posts......


However, sneuman made such an excellent point, that I thought I'd chime in on this ancillary issue.....(thanks, sneuman!!!!)

Originally Posted by sneuman

My personal opinion (as in IMHO) is that outrunning weather is more myth than reality, regardless of speed within cruising parameters. I'm not saying it doesn't happen sometimes. There was a thread on this topic some time ago (I can't seem to find it now) and the consensus was that no one (mono or multi) could give an example of having "outrun bad weather" on an offshore passage.

Someone is sure to come out of the woodwork to challenge this post, but we should keep in mind that that person is very probably the exception to the rule.

I'm not challenging this post directly, but rather just nudging it a little, from the side.....

To the best of my recollection, I've never outrun weather......
But, I have used speed and weather forecasts to manuever to better weather, find less violent winds/seas, and avoid the worst of storms.....


I did this most recently in summer 2007, sailing eastbound across the Atlantic, specifically on my passage from South Florida to Azores.....

I was able to use my vessel's speed (assisted by a decent wind and a favorable current), and a decent weather forecast, to head 60+ degrees off my course for almost two days and then another 30 degrees further off, for another day......while this had me sailing perpendicular to my destination, and added a couple hundred miles to my voyage, it DID put me in much nicer weather conditions......
(I had a few squals along a tail end of the front, but typically nothing more than 30 - 35 kts, and mostly only 20 - 25 kts for most of those 3 days, and seas of only 15' ....but had I not had the speed to manuever / arrive at new coordinates in short order, I'd have seen steady winds of 35 kts for days, with 45+ kts in squals and higher seas.....)

This is really nothing special....it's just good blue water seamanship......using your vessel's speed, combined with a decent forecast, to avoid bad weather.....


I've also done this, a few times, heading southward (south and southeast) in the Bahamas, running from a front in the winter and spring......
I never out-ran them, but I have manuevered my way to lessen their impact and/or find more secure anchorage.....
Some of these times, others did not have the speed (windward speed especially) to attempt it.....and some of these times, I did not either
And, some of these times, I didn't have decent weather forecasts, so I never moved.....

My most memorable attempt at out-running a strong front in the Bahamas, was back in the early 1970's.....this was with my parents, on their 49'......we didn't get much in the way of a weather forecast, since we weren't planning a long passage (ZNS weather and some grapevine forecasts).....
We, of course, got caught entering a secure cove just as the winds were hitting NW at 25 - 30kts......but, in the process we met (and assisted) a wonderful family on a small (~ 30') sloop just finishing their circumnavigation.......(although my Dad has passed, my Mom still keeps in touch with them, and visits them on occasion.....)


As you see from my personal experiences above, sneuman, I do mostly agree with you.....
It is NOT very common, but it does happen.....

Fair winds to all.....
{And, good luck trying to decide on what boats are "blue water"..... }

John

[osirissail]

- - As to Steve Dashew's suggestion to build for speed as a weather safety factor, his is really talking about his large type boats that can do 20kts not the smaller boats. A large fractions of ocean storms travel at about 15 kts so "outrunning" is feasible if you can keep up your speed. Another factor he does not mention is the ability underway to get live satellite and weather information, again if you can afford his size boats you can afford the satellite domes and costs.
- - As ka4wja mentions, diverting is a more realistic tactic for smaller boats than Steve Dashew's ships. Again you must have good sources of weather information to decide where the storm is and heading to and then alter course up to 90 degrees away from the track to "get out of the way." Generally if you can only do 1/3 to 1/4 of the storms speed you will not get too far out of the way - but every little bit helps even if you can just get over from the right front dangerous sector and into the left hand sector - winds and waves will be less by a factor of the forward speed of the storm.
- - The primary safety factor for weather is accurate information so you have many days to prepare and execute a strategy as ka4wja did. Without such information, you are totally at the mercy of Mother Nature. Prudence suggests you have plans and a boat equipped to take a beating anyway because your first line of defense - incoming weather information may fail to function, then what?