What EXACTLY is a "blue water boat"?

[mibo]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

But it your Porsche fundamentally better at getting you from A to B reliably , I would argue it isn’t.

I would pick the comparison with the automotive world up but I think the above is not hitting the point. Wouldn't it rather be something like this?

Is your Land Rover Discovery or Toyota Landcruiser fundamentally better at getting you from A to B off-road in the Rocky Mountains than your fancy Audi street SUV?

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by mibo

Nobody said the numbers are high. They just say rudder failure is the #1 reason for rescue operations.



As for the keel point, I am sure you know the Cheeki Rafiki case and what the investigators concluded. If not:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheeki_Rafiki



Further reading here:



Keel failure: the shocking facts - Yachting World

https://www.yachtingworld.com/news/k...ng-facts-60006

Yes but pointing to One keel failure doesn’t dam the whole concept.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by mibo

I would pick the comparison with the automotive world up but I think the above is not hitting the point. Wouldn't it rather be something like this?



Is your Land Rover Discovery or Toyota Landcruiser fundamentally better at getting you from A to B off-road in the Rocky Mountains than your fancy Audi street SUV?

The Land Rover certainly looks the part , and as I’ve owned several it much more likely to break down , secondly it’s 4 wheel drive is crude , the seats break your back and the engine is utter rubbish

The Audi has Torsen diffs and by changing the tyres is a far more capable off-roader actually

This is my point

High end boats are not necessarily fundamentally better , a HR is an Audi SUV , the Benny is the Toyota

I’ve seen HRs put together , you can see exactly where all the costs are accumulating largely in the very limited application of automated machine processes. But simply cause three cabinet fabricators build a beautiful looking sets of drawers doesn’t fundamentally alter the underlying boat . The Bavaria’s mass produced cabinets will still happily hold the loaves of bread just the same.

Yes HR will have a hand laid teal deck ( screwed into the grp !!!) all fabricated by an very capable craftsman ( I stood beside him for an hour , as he fabricated the deck pieces on the boat using nothing but an upturned electric jigsaw ) whereas Beneteau will computer cut a teak deck and lay it as a sheet.

You’ll pay 10x to HR for that feature. But again it’s not fundamentally changing the boat.

[mibo]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Yes but pointing to One keel failure doesn’t dam the whole concept.

One??

Read the article:

"Indeed, so concerned is the sport’s governing body, ISAF, about the incidences of keel failure that it has formed a Keel Structure Working Party to investigate the issue. Part of the group’s initial work was to develop a database of the reported failures. Currently, the list includes 72 cases since 1984, and in those 24 lives have been lost – a small number perhaps when compared with the many thousands of boats that have been built over this period, but unacceptable nonetheless."

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by mibo

One??



Read the article:



"Indeed, so concerned is the sport’s governing body, ISAF, about the incidences of keel failure that it has formed a Keel Structure Working Party to investigate the issue. Part of the group’s initial work was to develop a database of the reported failures. Currently, the list includes 72 cases since 1984, and in those 24 lives have been lost – a small number perhaps when compared with the many thousands of boats that have been built over this period, but unacceptable nonetheless."

If you read the published keel failures , you find in most cases keels that were modified , tampered with or preexisting damage that’s wasn’t properly repaired and so forth.

A keel in good order doesn’t fall off

We need to leave this asinine debate behind , every major manufacturer is using bolt on keels. There are 100,000s out there and they are not falling off. Long keels debates now sound like anti-Vaxxers

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Na Mara

On boats there is the stuff that’s makes you safe, the stuff that makes you go and the stuff that makes you comfortable. And now for the gross generalization with more than a grain of truth to it. For a given size, the blue water cruiser makes sacrifices in the third to optimize the first and, to a lesser extent, second,; the racer, daysailer and weekender optimizes the second at the expense of the other two; and the coastal cruiser sacrifices the first and, to a lesser extent the second, to optimize the first. The larger the boat the less sacrifices required for a given program.

For example, a bluewater/ocean monohull cruiser won’t have an exaggerated beam and interior with wide open spaces, as the former reduces the ability of a loaded boat to make to windward against a steep head sea under sail or power (previous AWB owner speaking from experience) and the latter increases the risk of crew injuries. At every juncture where a design or equiping decision like the above is made, the manufacturer and then the owner will give precedence to the stuff that keeps you safe and then the stuff that makes you go on a blue water boat.

I bought my boat for 200000 euro, I have since spent 60000 euro upgrading her and plan to spend another 40000. Hardly a euro of that has been spent on comfort items. I have replaced stuff that broke in the comfort department and fixed stuff myself but that is it.

The point is what exactly are you prepping for sending 100,000 sounds like lots of stuff was broken when you bought it.

Heavy weather and violent confused seas are far more likely in extended coastal trips , say Atlantic France out of season for example

Ocean storms in deep water tend to quite regular and manageable , this is my experience , a F10 in November in Biscay is a potential boat killer whereas an F11 in mid Atlantic was manageable ( just ! )

Interior safety is not as simple as you present. Handholds are largely useless in a violent seaway as you struggle to hold on anyway. ( I’ve had to crawl on the sole) and anyway handholds can easily added if you feel the existing ones are deficient. Again the vast majority of times you can traverse the interior easily.

Also beam has its advantages it brings better static and dynamic stability. Boat speed is a huge advantage , especially in the predominant light airs and the ability to avoid bad weather

Progress to windward tends to be very good in modern design language too and the twin rudder tends to always keep one immersed.

Hydro dynamically a good conservative fin keel and spade rudder can’t be beaten in heavy weather the boat can be controlled even in surfing conditions and is far more resistant to broaching ( the beam helps here to )

Couple this with hi tech cruising sails and it’s a very capable machine

Most people who have not done any significant long ocean voyages tend to acquire knowledge from reading or discourse , there tends to be a complete over focus on “ equipment “ or a almost fantastical benefit that some how a particular “ feature “ of a boat will save them in extremis.

A blue water boat doesn’t exist. A blue water skipper and crew does. Crews do blue water not the boats. The boat will not save you if you don’t know what you are doing. You can’t make up for lack of experience with equipment or boat “ features “

[Na Mara]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

The point is what exactly are you prepping for sending 100,000 sounds like lots of stuff was broken when you bought it.

Heavy weather and violent confused seas are far more likely in extended coastal trips , say Atlantic France out of season for example

Ocean storms in deep water tend to quite regular and manageable , this is my experience , a F10 in November in Biscay is a potential boat killer whereas an F11 in mid Atlantic was manageable ( just ! )

Interior safety is not as simple as you present. Handholds are largely useless in a violent seaway as you struggle to hold on anyway. ( I’ve had to crawl on the sole) and anyway handholds can easily added if you feel the existing ones are deficient. Again the vast majority of times you can traverse the interior easily.

Also beam has its advantages it brings better static and dynamic stability. Boat speed is a huge advantage , especially in the predominant light airs and the ability to avoid bad weather

Progress to windward tends to be very good in modern design language too and the twin rudder tends to always keep one immersed.

Hydro dynamically a good conservative fin keel and spade rudder can’t be beaten in heavy weather the boat can be controlled even in surfing conditions and is far more resistant to broaching ( the beam helps here to )

Couple this with hi tech cruising sails and it’s a very capable machine

Most people who have not done any significant long ocean voyages tend to acquire knowledge from reading or discourse , there tends to be a complete over focus on “ equipment “ or a almost fantastical benefit that some how a particular “ feature “ of a boat will save them in extremis.

A blue water boat doesn’t exist. A blue water skipper and crew does. Crews do blue water not the boats. The boat will not save you if you don’t know what you are doing. You can’t make up for lack of experience with equipment or boat “ features “

My heavy weather experience is on the Atlantic coast of Scotland and Ireland as well as in the Northsea. I am well aware of the difference between atlantic rollers and what these become as they enter shoal and tidal waters.

Its precisely because handholds are useless (who here can hold their entire body weight plus additional acceleration forces on one hand?) that true bluewater cruisers do not rely on handholds for crew safety. Move around below on a blue water boat and you will find you are never further than a couple of feet from a surface you can brace your shoulder or your bum against. If you are on a boat where you have to crawl on the floor to safely move around the interior in serious weather, then you aren't on a blue water boat.

Modern light, beamy hulls slam badly to windward, so badly that they ultimately can't make way and have to bare off. I've had a boat like this. My hanse 370e would have to bear off in the kind of sea state you get in coastal waters in force 5. To me that is just unacceptable in a serious cruising boat and I sold her primarily because of this behaviour. She sailed like a witch downwind and on a beam reach, but her light displacement, soft u section bow and large beam seriously impacted windward performance in heavy seas. A blue water boat is one that will perform well no matter the conditions. It's one that will get you off a lee shore in a gale. My previous boat couldn't do that, not even with its little engine helping out, my present boat will do it under engine or under sail. The difference IS in the hull shape. The present boat has v-forward sections, long overhang, low windage, moderate beam, moderate displacement and balanced hull form, the last boat had a u-forward sections, plumb bow, high windage, wide beam, light displacement and delta planform.

That delta planform, which is so common these days, is fantastic for surfing downwind (I remember a memorable trip in 45kn winds on my hanse where we sped past helsingör in denmark at 12 kns average), but it actually increases the tendency for broaching and rounding up. That buoyant stern rises quickly to an approaching breaking sea, while the relatively less buoyant fine entry bow dives for the sea floor. Not only does this increase the tendency to broach but it also makes the foredeck a wet and dangerous place. Again a memorable night on my hanse when the shackle on the tack of the foresail failed in force 8 in the Northsea and I had to go up there and lash the tack down comes to mind. I spent the best part of an hour partially submerged in the Northsea.

Finally one of the lessens I have learned in my 35 years sailing many different type of cruisers is that there is a difference between top speed and passage making speed. A blue water boat will make steady progress over a wider range of conditions than its coastal counterpart while the latter will leave the former in the dust in ideal conditions. Ultimately, what I have found is that I passage planned on 6 knots when I had my Hanse. I still passage plan on 6 knots in my Regina. These are boats with similar LWLs and sail areas but where the Regina has almost twice the displacement of the Hanse. My Regina would never make 12 kn average boat speed like my Hanse did that one time, but then again my regina would have sailed me to weather that time I got caught in Loch Fyne with a Force 6 up the loch and short sharp seas completely stoped forward progress and forced us to seek shelter at Tarbert on the Mull. Yes the speed to avoid weather is valuable, but sometimes the safest path is through and then I know which boat I would rather have under me.

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

But it your Porsche fundamentally better at getting you from A to B reliably , I would argue it isn’t.

)

sorry...i've owned porsches...and - without question - it is

cheers,

[Tetepare]

Originally Posted by chrisr

sorry...i've owned porsches...and - without question - it is

cheers,

It’s an analogy goboatingnow wanted to make, though most won’t understand.

Any vehicle can go from A to B. But racing and tracking, like open ocean storms, taxes vehicles and shows which are up for it. Porsches and BMWs fare well even in factory trim; Camaros are too heavy and burn up brakes. When the kids with Mitsu EVOs showed up, my gosh those cars were fast, but when the engines started blowing up it demonstrated they weren’t “blue water”.

The Beneteau 430, a design I find to be stunning, has logged many offshore miles. It also has a history of losing rudders. I’d not consider it blue water. Note too the plethora of Beneteaus and Jeanneaus with grid separation, some after “minor bumps”. This would be cause for concern, at least to me.

Catalina 30s have crossed oceans. I don’t care how good the crew is, I’d not consider the design (structurally or capacity) blue water. And while we love our Legend 37.5, it would be easy to compile a list of reasons it’s not for offshore use.

[michaeld]

Just about anything that floats can be considered "blue water". Just Google up images of "Cuban refugee boats".

A previous Cal 2-27 model has circumnavigated. We took ours to the Bahamas twice, but I wouldn't consider crossing an ocean or even the Gulf of Mexico with it.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by Tetepare

It’s an analogy goboatingnow wanted to make, though most won’t understand.



Any vehicle can go from A to B. But racing and tracking, like open ocean storms, taxes vehicles and shows which are up for it. Porsches and BMWs fare well even in factory trim; Camaros are too heavy and burn up brakes. When the kids with Mitsu EVOs showed up, my gosh those cars were fast, but when the engines started blowing up it demonstrated they weren’t “blue water”.



The Beneteau 430, a design I find to be stunning, has logged many offshore miles. It also has a history of losing rudders. I’d not consider it blue water. Note too the plethora of Beneteaus and Jeanneaus with grid separation, some after “minor bumps”. This would be cause for concern, at least to me.



Catalina 30s have crossed oceans. I don’t care how good the crew is, I’d not consider the design (structurally or capacity) blue water. And while we love our Legend 37.5, it would be easy to compile a list of reasons it’s not for offshore use.

Interior structural Liners ( I dint think grid is correct ) in them selves don’t make a boat blue water or not.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by chrisr

sorry...i've owned porsches...and - without question - it is



cheers,

The accolades here for the 370 including rough weather sailing seem very positive

https://www.myhanse.com/hanse-370-fo...topic1401.html

[mibo]

Originally Posted by Tetepare

It’s an analogy goboatingnow wanted to make, though most won’t understand.

Any vehicle can go from A to B. But racing and tracking, like open ocean storms, taxes vehicles and shows which are up for it. Porsches and BMWs fare well even in factory trim; Camaros are too heavy and burn up brakes. When the kids with Mitsu EVOs showed up, my gosh those cars were fast, but when the engines started blowing up it demonstrated they weren’t “blue water”.

The Beneteau 430, a design I find to be stunning, has logged many offshore miles. It also has a history of losing rudders. I’d not consider it blue water. Note too the plethora of Beneteaus and Jeanneaus with grid separation, some after “minor bumps”. This would be cause for concern, at least to me.

Catalina 30s have crossed oceans. I don’t care how good the crew is, I’d not consider the design (structurally or capacity) blue water. And while we love our Legend 37.5, it would be easy to compile a list of reasons it’s not for offshore use.

Here you go. Cannot find any applause icon but would put it :-))

I will hardly ever forget seeing the rudder of a 2-year-old "Elan 434 Impression" float next to the boat 8 nm off Corsica. In 25 kn of wind.

Can I ask you 2 things:

Would you see Hunter in the same line with Beneteau and Jeanneau?

Following the "what was the boat made for?" path, how do you think size plays a role? Would a Sun Odyssey 49 or 54 / Hunter 45 or 460 GENERALLY be more "blue water" than a e.g. their 40 ft models?

[thomm225]

Originally Posted by michaeld

Just about anything that floats can be considered "blue water". Just Google up images of "Cuban refugee boats".

A previous Cal 2-27 model has circumnavigated. We took ours to the Bahamas twice, but I wouldn't consider crossing an ocean or even the Gulf of Mexico with it.

Cal 2-27's have completed the 2,120 mile Single Handed Transpac (SHTP) Race from San Francisco to Hawaii a few times.

https://www.sfbaysss.net/archive-sht...tsThru2012.pdf

Along with Moore 24's (Webb Childs Boat), Olsen 30's, Cal 20, Express 27, J/27, Bristol 27, Hawkfarm 28, etc

[Tetepare]

Originally Posted by mibo

Would you see Hunter in the same line with Beneteau and Jeanneau?

A larger boat is typically going to be more storm hardy than a small boat. I'd rather be in a 50' in a hurricane than a 30', for any given manufacturer.

The Hunter v. Catalina v. Beneteau v. Jeanneau argument is an old one, well covered for decades, and you can search here for multitudes of discussions.

It depends on year and model; Catalina has sporadically offered above-average boats (e.g., C34). Overall, my opinion (which will be disputed by those butt hurt) is that none of the production boats are designed to take a beating, though they have, and are really designed for coastal use. That of course doesn't mean they can't get to Hawai'i or anywhere; and once in the Pacific Islands, it's a short hop from A to B. I don't have statistics on the number of any of them that have been rolled and made it to port.

As far as used boats and how they've held up to general use (now this has virtually nothing to do with blue water) the 1970s and 1980s Hunters had some serious deficiencies, mostly in build quality. The 1990s they got better, and those < 20 YO are pretty nice.

Having been looking for a coastal cruiser for years, and been sailing for a half century, I've been aboard all manner of sailing yachts. The Beneteaus have aged poorly- they leak from everywhere, and the cherry laminates suck up water like straws and fall apart. Jeanneaus are a bit better; the Catalinas have held up better, with the teak laminates, and in most cases the Hunters, even with the leaks, look the best. That said, there are "too many" 1990s Hunters (and maybe even later) that the hull-deck joins are atrocious: I've seen several you could actually look outside through the separation!

I had my heart set on the Beneteau 430, and looked at them from east coast of USA through Australia (as in, physically was on the boats.) The decks are saturated, those beautiful overhead windows cannot be replaced, and general condition is poor. I could not find one worth restoring. Ditto the B50s we looked at.

That said, recently a Canadian B455 (or similar) 1990s vintage was brought into port to sell by a gent who lost his wife; reportedly, it had been chartered before he bought it. It was pristine; it was perfect, better than new. It sold almost immediately for 50% higher than equivalent boats.

Anyway, a lot depends on the boat, and the skipper/ crew. I'd not take a Legend 37.5 to Hawai'i. Now, if I had one already in Vava'u, I'd not hesitate to skip between most of the Pacific islands, with the right weather windows.

The fact that boat model XYZ has made it to Hawai'i, or around the world, doesn't mean every one of them can. I've seen plenty of people get damned lucky; I joined a 44' off Townsville which came from USA; they'd not hit any weather until then and it was a shitshow. The current speed record NY to CA is a Ford Mustang- but just because it's been done I wouldn't recommend a Mustang for 150+ MPH maintained, I'd rather have a Porsche- when ship happens the Mustang will have zero recovery; the fact that somebody did it, and ship did not happen doesn't mean it's OK every time.

It's kinda odd- those who go to war actually have a high survival rate, relatively speaking. But I never hear a veteran say "I wore no body armor and I survived!" as some sort of evidence that nobody needs body armor. There's a ton of luck in war, and there's a ton of luck in base jumping, and in crossing oceans in boats. Luck aside, I'd rather not push my luck too far.