What EXACTLY is a "blue water boat"?

[boatman61]

Boats I have owned and solo'd transat W to E..
Beneteau 321 SXM to UK nonstop.
Beneteau 331 BVI's to Azores to Portugal to Madeira to Azores to Galicia to UK.
Hunter 37c Oriental NC to Azores to UK.. a long trip with lots of hand steering
None come into the 'Bluewater' class..
Its not what you sail.. its how you sail..

[OldManMirage]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Exactly! One factor overlooked is the effect of heavy displacement, particularly in the ends of the vessel, when encountering waves from ahead of the beam. A light boat will more quickly and abruptly react to the waves, and will ride over them and this is thought to be a less comfortable motion than that of a heavier boat. On the other hand is what happens to that heavier yacht which does NOT ride over the waves but plows directly into them. Given a bigger wave the heavier yacht, (with weight in the ends it is worse) plunges deep into the wave, throwing tons of water to each side, and it's forward progress is dramatically slowed.

Next buoyancy comes into play and this boat, with it's bow deep into the wave face, and nearly stopped, begins to rise, quickly. As the crest passes under the hull the bow will arch skyward, then plunge dramatically into the next wave. Two waves in a row like this and the boat can be totally stopped. It doesn't matter if the heavy boat is sailing or motoring, in these conditions it STOPS.

I've sailed on both types of boats and without a doubt, I prefer the jarring, jerky ride of a boat going over the waves, (BUT GOING), over the hobby horsing heavyweight which plunges deeply into each wave and cannot maintain headway in a seaway.

Nobody is comfortable, but one of us is making progress.

I have not found this to be the case. It may be true on paper, I don't know. But I have owned a Catalina 27 and I now have a Cape Dory 28. The Catalina was better only in light air. In all other conditions, the Cape Dory handles herself better. Tracks better, rides better, handles waves better. Especially when the wind kicked up the waves. It was the lighter Catalina that would get stopped, while the heavier Cape Dory continues on. No she doesn't point as high, no she won't tack as quickly. But neither of those qualities make the Catalina a better boat for "Blue Water."

And even though a Catalina 27 has sailed around the world (with some modifications), the Cape Dory 28 has multiple ocean crossings by many different people, and she was designed to do just that sort of thing. The Catalina was not. I'm sure there could be boats "like" the Catalina, i.e., lighter displacement and fin-keeled, that are designed and built strong enough for an ocean crossing. But, for me, I find the Cape Dory to be a much better "Blue Water" boat.

[Kennyk]

In two words island packet

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Exactly! One factor overlooked is the effect of heavy displacement, particularly in the ends of the vessel, when encountering waves from ahead of the beam. A light boat will more quickly and abruptly react to the waves, and will ride over them and this is thought to be a less comfortable motion than that of a heavier boat. On the other hand is what happens to that heavier yacht which does NOT ride over the waves but plows directly into them. Given a bigger wave the heavier yacht, (with weight in the ends it is worse) plunges deep into the wave, throwing tons of water to each side, and it's forward progress is dramatically slowed.

Next buoyancy comes into play and this boat, with it's bow deep into the wave face, and nearly stopped, begins to rise, quickly. As the crest passes under the hull the bow will arch skyward, then plunge dramatically into the next wave. Two waves in a row like this and the boat can be totally stopped. It doesn't matter if the heavy boat is sailing or motoring, in these conditions it STOPS.

I've sailed on both types of boats and without a doubt, I prefer the jarring, jerky ride of a boat going over the waves, (BUT GOING), over the hobby horsing heavyweight which plunges deeply into each wave and cannot maintain headway in a seaway.

Nobody is comfortable, but one of us is making progress.

This assertion is interesting, and pretty dramatic. But I'd really like to see which boats you are talking about and what the sea state is. The wave period, steepness and wave speed that will do this, stop a boat, sounds like you are heading directly into the waves, steep ones, which is pretty unusual in sailing, common in motoring. But the hull design, and heel angle, play a role here I believe. The displacement of the boat is water that must be pushed out of the way and then smoothly left behind. And HOW a hull parts the waters matters. I can think of heavy-ish hulls that punch through pretty well, ride well and though they may not point as well as their fin/spade brethren, make good headway. My friend's Freya 39 comes to mind and my other friend's Luders 30 too. And my own 29. The old skinny CCA boats, which do have a rep for hobby horsing if loaded too heavily in the ends, still, once heeled as they love to be, do a pretty good job of maintaining headway, and doing it comfortably, I believe. Others, heavier and necessarily needing more flotation in the bow, present more displacement to ram through the sloping wall of a wave, I agree, but even then, sailing, the walls don't often present themselves that way do they? In any case HOW a hull displaces the water it occupies is certainly pertinent to what makes a good "bluewater" boat, or any kind of boat

[MartinR]

Yes, this is about design, not displacement or keel shape. Of the 6 long-keeled boats I have owned, 5 of them have been a joy beating up in chop. Better behaved than the typical modern production boat, less tiring on the crew. Yes, you point a little lower, but that in itself makes for a more comfortable motion, albeit you sacrifice a little bit of VMG.

[bluenomads]

Originally Posted by thomm225

An Ocean Crossing Cat for $10,000 - $20,000?

I think Kittiwake are selling their Hirondelle (or is it a Prout?) for this sort of money. These boats have (very carefully!) made some ocean miles over the years.

[bouncycastle]

The idea to have ocean sail cruising boats that can punch their way upwind in high winds and large waves is going to often add huge cost or complexity to most boats of this class sub 45 feet overall length. The harsh reality ocean cruising boats often lightly crewed with lots of excess weight from water tanks fuel tanks food etc. with high winds high waves dictates to most boats they will be going downwind. Some regions of the world even larger boats will be forced down wind. One 55 foot deep keel boat with 120 HP engine while only two miles offshore a Mediterranean island southern France got hit with ~60 mph Mistral winds .Even the boat was in the Lee of the island not big wave with engine on full power and storm sails the boat on 10 mile tacks could only make 100 foot gain on each tack .The boat took 24 hours to return to the marina. The med has the problem the top two feet of the water moves in the direction of the wind .Even a ~10 foot deep keel can't do well losing two feet of the keel due to wind driven currents. The latest Globe race around the world lost two ~ 34 feet boats in 16 Meter waves in the Indian ocean .Both boats in the same storm bare poled running down wind with ropes out were rolled and both lost their masts .For injury reasons one Capitan had to be rescued . The Australian navy in the region sorta made it necessary the other boat had to be rescued the same time even he had rigged a jury rig and could probably get to Australia's shores. When the wind and waves are big and the waves height exceed the length of the boat the chances to get rolled are increased. The statistics for crossing the North Atlantic route with high winds is one boat in 100 will have serious event death injury or sinking. The mid latitude route from Africa to the central American regions tends to have more problems with Coral reefs after they have crossed the ocean. I haven't found much link to suggest that lighter coastal cruisers are at any greater risks than heavier class boats as the cruisers all try to avoid to ever sail upwind. Cruising boats will plan routes to keep to sail downwind often waiting months at some location for the wind to reverse direction to suit them . Coastal sailing requirements tend to be totally different to offshore ocean sailing requirements. Weight becomes the big enemy to speed on long ocean sails . Don't get me wrong before you do a long offshore sail do some sailing coastal heavily loaded to find what stuff breaks. Weak links can be old sails blowing out winches that fail Rigging that snaps or chain plates that pull out and worse rudders that snap. Its like your car it goes to work every day no sweat but when you go on holidays tow the trailer with all the family in the car then the car breaks down. Stainless steel rigging on older boats often is too old .Modern recommendations are replace the rigging every 15 years but very few 1990 boats will have rigging that is from 2005. Rigging a 35 foot boat costs big bucks . Newer sails costs big bucks . Ocean safety equipment costs big bucks. Lack of funds to replace broken or worn equipment means fire sales of boats in strange parts of the planet. Ocean sailing is not for the unprepared there is often no boat yards to do repairs in the middle of the oceans .Nothing to stop the OP to buy larger boat now for comfortable coastal cruising for the next ten years then downsize when he is ready to larger distances with ocean sailing .

[Kanani]

Short story that may be helpful to the OP:

In 1994 I met a young sailor named "Donald Kang". We were both hauled out, next to each other, in Lautoka Fiji.

Donald had an older Cal25 that was in pretty desperate shape. He told me that he was on a quest to be the 1st Korean citizen to circumnavigate the globe. I remember being pretty concerned at the time and spent several days teaching him how to apply F/G. We glassed up his hull to keel seam (after tightening the keel bolts) and did some pretty extensive repairs to his spade rudder. Donald had zero knowledge of boat construction or maintenance at the time. When he started his journey, he was very inexperienced. What Donald did posses was self-confidence and determination. If one is lacking in those 2 attributes, there could be problems no matter what boat one is sailing.

Anyway, to make a long story short, we sailed together from Fiji > New Zealand > Australia > through several islands in the Indian Ocean > South Africa. We stayed in contact via SSB radio and he went through some real crap in the Indian Ocean.

That Cal25 is now sitting in a national museum in South Korea. Donald is now married with 2 kids and life goes on.

The question here is....... is a Cal25 (early 70's) a "Blue water" vessel?

I only bring up this example because I have 1st hand experience with it but I have sailed with MANY small production and home-built boats over the years. I have also experienced MANY-Many disasters in my 100,000+ miles of sailing. My opinion of "Blue Water" capable vessels has changed with my many years of experience. IMO it is 90% skipper and 10% vessel.

[bouncycastle]

Originally Posted by bluenomads

I think Kittiwake are selling their Hirondelle (or is it a Prout?) for this sort of money. These boats have (very carefully!) made some ocean miles over the years.

Yes that couple did very well with that boat .I think it is only 26 feet long but isn't a Prout or Hirondle I forget which class it is .
It is some well known make from that time period and has a g rear cabin which protects the crew in bad waves from the rear
A clever solution is fly to Italy buy the boat and sail across the Atlantic the easy route mid latitudes . That saves the risk to do the hard route the North Atlantic . With the smaller boats of these types when your running downwind in bigger wind there exists larger risk to bury nose and go turtle head over heals . Best to throw out the sea anchor in force seven and keep nose into the waves and keep the heavy gear towards the aft .
I go with the logic its 90% the ability to sail to reduce risks and 10% the boat.

[Kanani]

Originally Posted by WingRyder

My question is this: Do you NEED a blue water boat to make an occasional blue water passage? Or are "blue water" boats made to withstand continuous ocean passages. I would like to get the best built boat that I can afford, and I understand that I will probably have to put a LOT of sweat equity into any boat purchase in my initial price range ($10 - $20k).

I like your attitude. My advise (having done it myself) is to buy a boat that fits YOUR needs.

What I did in 1983 was I purchased a 1968 Columbia 36 (considered by most to be a "day sailor"). The boat had a sound hull. The mast was corroded through at the bottom, the rigging was shot and it had no electronic gear.

I immediately removed the mast and rigging. Shortened the mast 4" to remove the corrosion and installed all new rigging (I went up 1 size). I installed a ProFurl roller furling, tightend the keel bolts, installed all new though hull fittings and hardware, replaced the gas engine with a diesel engine (that I overhauled... never worked on a diesel before). I installed a knot-meter, depth sounder, anemometer. ant a tri-color mast head light. I purchased a used 44# CQR anchor and 300' of 3/8" BBB chain and a new 40# Danforth High Tensil anchor and road. I stripped the deck and resealed the stansions etc and replaced the life-lines...... I'm sure there was more. The bigger point is that I KNEW my boat when I left and was confident that I could fix anything that went wrong.


Anyway, I put a lot of sweat equity in that boat and even more along the way as I completed my 1st circumnavigation in that boat.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by TeddyDiver

My apologies for you (and Polux) but I can't stand single dogma missionaries when the truth is not that simple..Teddy

Well said,Teddy, but recall please that we entered into this discussion after it was asserted by more than one person ONLY a heavy, full keeled, boat can be called a "Blue water boat". THAT is a single dogma.

I like a lot of boat types. I'm not the single dogma missionary and I'm trying to show that a performance boat which can go to windward can be a good cruising boat too, and has advantages, and that in my experience they are better than the full keel heavies.

And it does please me greatly to see that the discussion has broadened into more about how boats behave, the pro's and cons, than just dogma. Read this part of Don's comment below:

Originally Posted by Don C L

I can think of heavy-ish hulls that punch through pretty well, ride well and though they may not point as well as their fin/spade brethren, make good headway. My friend's Freya 39 comes to mind and my other friend's Luders 30 too. And my own 29. The old skinny CCA boats, which do have a rep for hobby horsing if loaded too heavily in the ends, still, once heeled as they love to be, do a pretty good job of maintaining headway, and doing it comfortably, I believe. Others, heavier and necessarily needing more flotation in the bow, present more displacement to ram through the sloping wall of a wave, I agree, but even then, sailing, the walls don't often present themselves that way do they? In any case HOW a hull displaces the water it occupies is certainly pertinent to what makes a good "bluewater" boat, or any kind of boat

He gets it,

And,

Originally Posted by bouncycastle

The idea to have ocean sail cruising boats that can punch their way upwind in high winds and large waves is going to often add huge cost or complexity to most boats of this class sub 45 feet overall length...as the cruisers all try to avoid to ever sail upwind. Cruising boats will plan routes to keep to sail downwind often waiting months at some location for the wind to reverse direction to suit them

Bouncy, you're right about cruisers trying to avoid going upwind. It doesn't always work. In 1998 a group of 20 or so yachts staged in Tonga and Fiji waiting for a weather window cross to New Zealand, a 7 to 10 day passage. One day it looked good and the weather routers agreed. We all left. Four days later a low developed north of us and moved southward. Caught on the wrong side of it we faced headwinds going to New Zealand. Five boats were lost and four people lost thier lives. A 30ft fin keel boat made it. A Tayana 37 did not, with a loss of life. A 53 foot fin keel boat dragged ashore after making it to New Zealand; another loss of life. A Cal 40, fin keel, which made a wrong choice early on and sailed too far to the west, had to fight back to windward for three days, but made it.

https://wingssail.blogspot.com/1998/...e-off-new.html

And finally, I know that smaller boats have a harder time with headwinds. But in any size range, a boat which can sail to windward will fare better in those conditions than one which cannot, even heavily loaded. My 42 footer was always loaded to the gills, but it still sailed well. One thing we didn't have is a row of jerry cans on deck. We didn't need them.

[NormanMartin]

Wingsail... speaking of jerry cans on the rail. That is a sure-fire sign of a not-blue-water sailor no matter what the boat.

[MartinR]

I guess most things are already said in this thread.

In my opinion, the Westsail 32 is a good choice. Thuraya performed great in the GGR. She survived being rolled and battered by a heavy storm. I guess, had she had a little canvas forward to stabilise her downwind, she would have survived unscathed. Suhaili sailed countless miles in bad conditions. Also worth thinking about is the OE 32, a similar boat, but with a more modern sail plan and better performance. Maybe hard to find in the US, though.

In the end it all depends on the sailor. I would not overthink it, though. Buy a boat, sail and have fun. Doesn't need much money. Life is risky in itself. Better to live it while it lasts.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Kanani

I like your attitude. My advise (having done it myself) is to buy a boat that fits YOUR needs.

What I did in 1983 was I purchased a 1968 Columbia 36 Anyway, I put a lot of sweat equity in that boat and even more along the way as I completed my 1st circumnavigation in that boat.

https://sailboatdata.com/sailboat/columbia-36

[MartinR]

Originally Posted by Kanani

I have also experienced MANY-Many disasters in my 100,000+ miles of sailing.

disasters turn sailing into adventure