Bluewater Cruising Capability

[goboatingnow]

HR and Bavaria, Oyster and Delphia do tend to look more and more the same and they may share the same engine, mast, hardware, etc.. manufacturers. But there is still a number of points where they do differ.

perhaps , but the things that are different have little to do with the boats ability and lots to do with how its looks.!

The old boat styles were developed from experience....water is powerful, and it's better to live with little windows that minimise the surface area liable to being stove in (and easier to jury rig a repair on), and cosy interiors where if the boat starts to do somersaults you don't feefall across the cavernous lounge. There's always a tradeoff....a dockominium and marina posing platform and fairweathersailer is not going to be good at surviving the sea when it has the temerity to wrinkle up beyond daysail conditions.

Sorry what primarily determined building choices in old boats, was the material science ( or rather the lack of it). Non monocoque wooden boats are weak, hatches from multi-piece metals and wood with poor glass, were weak. Thats what determined the size of openings, no more then it determined the size of windows in houses, versus all glass structures today.

The fact is that leisure sailing and hence leisure boats are a very modern invention, Even in the 60 and 70s doing a circumnavigation got you knighted, now every tom dick and sally can do it. The number of leisure boats sailing is 1000- fold what was in the past. It simply doesnt withstand the facts, Boats today are not sinking or falling apart while crossing oceans. ( in fact I would argue that Northern latitude, continental shelf sailing is Much more demanding then crossing oceans BTW)

Im not saying everything is perfect , but good design and an understanding of boats didn't stop in 1965.

My boat has portholes that open. Before I took this boat bluewater I would replace them with fixed. Just as an example.

Why?, a proper opening light with good dogs is just as string as the hull its in . Then carry a few storm boards as well. There fixed.

You need to keep your boat on the surface at all costs, If the boat is capable, then its up to the sailor to manage what ever is thrown at him, or her,

Thats a nice idea, in practice the water filled sentient carbon life form is not as strong as an inanimate object. In reality its rarely the boat ( production or other wise)
Dave

[silverp40]

Originally Posted by Don Lucas

Instead of asking on CF where you will get a bunch of "I heard from someone who heard it from Joe that Mike told him that some marina monkey once saw a X on the hard and because he had read it in a forum ...." answers, you should go seek answers from owners.

Try here:

CatalinaOwners.com - Home

There are a lot of very experienced voyagers on the CF that can contribute valuable information on the subject.....this implication is pure conjecture .

[Kratch]

As an infrequent, inconsistent posters to these boards, I would just like to present my perception of this discussion for your consideration. I will use an analogy outside of sailing in hopes it will provide an bit of perspective. This thread looks very much like a person looking for advice on an ideal economical option for digging a hole in their backyard for a foundation and basement level addition to their house, and being told that it is the tenacity of the digger that matters, you can technically dig a whole with a fork and your hands. While the response may be technically true 1: It doesn't answer the actual question asked, 2: it is incredibly unhelpful and pretentious, 3: it is off-putting to anyone interested in finding a regular community they can seek advice in.

Take this for what you will. Thankfully, I have found some very helpful and friendly individuals on these boards, so I'll personally stick around.

[Jamel]

Originally Posted by Cheechako

Good inexpensive coastal boats.... but I wouldnt want to be out in real rough weather in one. The hulls flex pretty well, the keel is bolted on and the surrounding glass isnt that thick... etc... That doesnt mean they CANT be taken around the world, it just means if you are going to do that, choose a more forgiving boat....

Having just sailed my 2003 Catalina 42 from California across the Pacific to Bundaberg, Queensland I would tend to disagree with Cheechako.

I find the boat to be comfortable,stiff, fast and capable in weather....40 kt gale, 24hrs, beam reaching doing 8kts....good enough for me!

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Kratch

As an infrequent, inconsistent posters to these boards, I would just like to present my perception of this discussion for your consideration. I will use an analogy outside of sailing in hopes it will provide an bit of perspective. This thread looks very much like a person looking for advice on an ideal economical option for digging a hole in their backyard for a foundation and basement level addition to their house, and being told that it is the tenacity of the digger that matters, you can technically dig a whole with a fork and your hands. While the response may be technically true 1: It doesn't answer the actual question asked, 2: it is incredibly unhelpful and pretentious, 3: it is off-putting to anyone interested in finding a regular community they can seek advice in.

Take this for what you will. Thankfully, I have found some very helpful and friendly individuals on these boards, so I'll personally stick around.

No,it's not. To take your analogy what is being said is ( a) no you need the fancyist backhoe capable of dealing with any problem , it can blast through rock, dig 100 feet down to find solid ground. Others say ( b) naw almost any backhoe with a good operator can do this. Some say. (C) nonsense it can be done with a spoon.


Dave

[surfingminniwinni]

Originally Posted by Jamel

Having just sailed my 2003 Catalina 42 from California across the Pacific to Bundaberg, Queensland I would tend to disagree with Cheechako.

I find the boat to be comfortable,stiff, fast and capable in weather....40 kt gale, 24hrs, beam reaching doing 8kts....good enough for me!

Good on you mate, you have actually done it. The armchair and Internet sailors, that never leave the comfort of the marina will beg to differ.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

(...) perhaps , but the things that are different have little to do with the boats ability and lots to do with how its looks.! (...)

Dave,

The way I see this is contrary: I think the difference is where it counts most: the structure is better designed and better produced on the more expensive boats while the cosmetics tend to be converging with each passing year.

I am yet to see one of the upper shelf boats where the rudder snapped off or where the keel fell off. So I believe they may make better sea going boats than their cosmetically nearly identical, slightly less expensive competition.

barnakiel

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

No,it's not. To take your analogy what is being said is ( a) no you need the fancyist backhoe capable of dealing with any problem , it can blast through rock, dig 100 feet down to find solid ground. Others say ( b) naw almost any backhoe with a good operator can do this. Some say. (C) nonsense it can be done with a spoon.


Dave

Pretty much sums up how I read it.

[vtcapo]

Originally Posted by skipmac

VT, No one in this thread ever, ever said or suggested in any way to not be prepared for ocean voyaging. Nor did anyone ever imply in any way that a well made boat was not a good thing nor recommend taking a piece of junk on an offshore cruise. The only point I ever tried to make is the world's strongest hull is not necessary to safely sail to the Bahamas or many other destinations.

Again, here is a easily understood analogy. You don't need a sledge hammer to drive in a carpet tack. A sledge hammer will certainly do the job, but so will a tack hammer, and the tack hammer will be more efficient and easier to use.

Since you relate to math I might suggest a slight modification to Lake Superiors formula. In addition to the factors for probability of storms, etc add 1/Sc where Sc is the skill of the captain.

I might add that using that formula, with even a modicum of attention to weather in sailing to the Bahamas and even all the way to the Antilles the factor Pbs will be extremely small, resulting in a value for Ps approaching 1, reducing the impact of Pbf. Doesn't mean to ignore Pbf but logic would dictate that over emphasis on that factor would yield minimal returns for the time and cost incurred.

I don’t know what you have been reading but a number of so called “seasoned sailors” on this forum seem to have dismissed the idea of preparing their boat for any eventuality by basically saying experience trumps preparation, Read Barnakiel’s post. This is the kind of hubris that gets people killed, even though he seems to have changed his thinking by saying a heavier displacement well found boat will increase your chances for survival in a later post.

We have “seasoned sailors” saying that ANY stock boat will do for a circumnavigation. We have others who believe in the foolish notion that if you pay attention to every miniscule detail you will never leave the dock. If you are planning on crossing an ocean the responsible sailor will be circumspect and cross every t and dot every i. If not, he or she is negligent.

I have said before, you don’t need a heavy displacement double ender to cross over to the Bahamas or for that matter circumnavigate. That is a matter of personal preference. Those clips by Thomm225 should be a wake up call to those who think along the lines of the above two paragraphs. Your boat better be up to snuff if you get caught out in the ****. Frankly I don’t give a rats ass about the level of anyone’s experience or how prudent you are concerning the weather windows. Whether you are a Bernard Moitessier, the Pardey’s or f*cking Popeye, if you plan to make extensive off shore passages and your boat is not up for the challenge either make sure your insurance policies are up to date or don’t leave the dock.

RT
PS Knowing how the weather patterns are becoming more unpredictable and what the weight of water is capable of doing, I’ll take my sledgehammer over a tack hammer on any given day….
PPS Almost forgot….Getting back to the OP’s original question concerning whether or not the Catalina 315 is a capable Blue Water boat? An empathic NO! Can it be altered to do that? To begin with you have a light displacement fin keeled boat with an unprotected rudder. As far a Blue Water is concerned that would cross her off my list. She is at best a pocket cruiser and I would watch the weather and not venture too far off shore.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by vtcapo

I don’t know what you have been reading but a number of so called “seasoned sailors” on this forum seem to have dismissed the idea of preparing their boat for any eventuality by basically saying experience trumps preparation, Read Barnakiel’s post. This is the kind of hubris that gets people killed, even though he seems to have changed his thinking by saying a heavier displacement well found boat will increase your chances for survival in a later post.

We have “seasoned sailors” saying that ANY stock boat will do for a circumnavigation. We have others who believe in the foolish notion that if you pay attention to every miniscule detail you will never leave the dock. If you are planning on crossing an ocean the responsible sailor will be circumspect and cross every t and dot every i. If not, he or she is negligent.

(...)

" ... Read Barnakiel’s post. This is the kind of hubris that gets people killed ..."

You have clearly not read Barnakiel's posts carefully. And if you did pls quote the ones where he was trying to kill people.

hu·bris (hybrs) also hy·bris (h-) n. Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance.

Well, Barnakiel's hubris somehow failed to kill Barnakiel sailing rtw in his little shooter. So perhaps he has the right to say things the way he did them. He is not talking people into crossing oceans in an un-seaworthy boat. Or is he?

Now the way Barnakiel puts it: experience leads one to choosing tools that are up to the job, be it sailing, gardening or any other walk of life. How can an inexperienced sailor know how to prepare their boat, and themselves, for a crossing?

Barnakiel IS a strong believer of the proposition that experience is gained from experiencing rather than from spending one's life preparing for experiencing.

The best boat, best prepared and under the best, non-arrogant skipper is of course a very nice thing. Just look around and ask yourself how often it is the case.

I sailed places in my hubris little ship and met other sailors in smaller, less seaworthy boats. I also met sailors who prepared for years and then abandoned five days out. The opposite of these two situations is of course common too.

I hope this sorts out some of the hubris allegations.

barnakiel

[foolishsailor]

Foolishsailor loves it when Barnakiel speaks in third person!

[sww914]

Since I've been cruising, the boat most commonly cruised in Mexico is a Hunter between 35 and 45 feet long.

[vtcapo]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

" ... Read Barnakiel’s post. This is the kind of hubris that gets people killed ..."

You have clearly not read Barnakiel's posts carefully. And if you did pls quote the ones where he was trying to kill people.

hu·bris (hybrs) also hy·bris (h-) n. Overbearing pride or presumption; arrogance.

Well, Barnakiel's hubris somehow failed to kill Barnakiel sailing rtw in his little shooter. So perhaps he has the right to say things the way he did them. He is not talking people into crossing oceans in an un-seaworthy boat. Or is he?

Now the way Barnakiel puts it: experience leads one to choosing tools that are up to the job, be it sailing, gardening or any other walk of life. How can an inexperienced sailor know how to prepare their boat, and themselves, for a crossing?

Barnakiel IS a strong believer of the proposition that experience is gained from experiencing rather than from spending one's life preparing for experiencing.

The best boat, best prepared and under the best, non-arrogant skipper is of course a very nice thing. Just look around and ask yourself how often it is the case.

I sailed places in my hubris little ship and met other sailors in smaller, less seaworthy boats. I also met sailors who prepared for years and then abandoned five days out. The opposite of these two situations is of course common too.

I hope this sorts out some of the hubris allegations.

barnakiel

In your own words, “Having crossed oceans and having been knocked and bruised I will say our boat here is not safe enough and not seaworthy enough but given the voyages we take she is "marginally safe and seaworthy enough". Twisted? Yes.”

Twisted, yes! Marginally safe doesn’t fly with me. Going it alone with a marginally safe vessel, no problem. Like I used to tell my lazy students who insist they don’t feel it necessary to study before an exam, “everyone has a right to fail”. But we are not talking Middle school Algebra, we are talking about sea-sense. When you place someone aboard for a Blue Water passage, that’s a different story. As Captain and/or owner your responsibility to the crew is to provide a vessel not marginally safe, but safe to the degree that all possible contingences have been addressed before you leave the dock.

No, Hubris is the correct word when describing someone who “arrogantly presumes” that his or her marginal standards will stand the test of wind and sea. You need another word? How about irresponsible?

RT
PS Almost forgot. It is “irresponsibility” that kills someone sooner or later at sea…..

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by vtcapo

In your own words, “Having crossed oceans and having been knocked and bruised I will say our boat here is not safe enough and not seaworthy enough but given the voyages we take she is "marginally safe and seaworthy enough". Twisted? Yes.”

Twisted, yes! Marginally safe doesn’t fly with me. Going it alone with a marginally safe vessel, no problem.

(...)

As Captain and/or owner your responsibility to the crew is to provide a vessel not marginally safe, but safe to the degree that all possible contingences have been addressed before you leave the dock.

OK. Now I understand what you are saying. Below my response to your doubts:

"Marginally safe and seaworthy enough" please read "as safe and seaworthy as 24' of LWL can buy". Meaning: unsafe and unseaworthy when the job at hand is sailing round the world. (However, it was not our plan ever to rtw in the first place, it just happened. Hence I believe we cannot be blamed for choosing the wrong boat).

As far as addressing all possible contingencies goes then it has never been part of my lifestyle. Neither has it been part of the lifestyle of my partner. We believe life is full of choice, opportunity and accident. I know other people have other lifestyles and other philosophies. If everybody were the same this would be a very boring place.

Some people will try to meticulously plan all contingencies while others will just get into their boats and go sailing. I have failed to notice any regularity as to which group makes more successful sailors.

Cheers,
b.

[vtcapo]

Well that sort of changes everything. You have a mate that will follow you come hell or high water! You are one lucky MF. My wife won’t even get on the boat.

I applaud you and your SO and wish you the best in ALL your exploits.

RT
PS Buy a life raft. Your SO is a rare find. You owe it to her….And yourself.