Advantages to have a small boat

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by tuffr2

I may be wrong but I think I heard a wave 1/3 the length of the boat can capsize the boat. So a 60' boat could be capsized by a 20' wave a 30' boat could be capsized by a 10' wave.

Now, not sure if this takes into consideration the way the wave hits the boat. Or is this formula is for a head on wave?

AH! But a small boat can turn faster to face the offending wave sooner and punch it!

[TooCoys]

Originally Posted by chrisss

Hi! I'm very new to sailing and i want to know are there any advantages to have a smaller boat than a bigger boat(bigger yachts cost more obviously), but is it easier to sail?Better to handle?

I'm not sure if I've even responded to this thread previously, but given my experience this past weekend I'll comment again, or for the first time.

I just bought my first sailboat. It's 27', and I've only test sailed it once with the most knowledgeable friend I could find on the day - and that wasn't much knowledge.

Over the past weekend, we went out with friends on their 1978, 47' Perry ketch. Let me tell you - I wouldn't want that thing to be my first boat even if it was given to me. They have two jibs, a mainsail, and a mizzen sail, and there are lines EVERYWHERE. Although they often sail as a couple, we had 8 aboard that night and three of us were working the sails and we were all worn out.

It didn't seem that hard to maneuver, but the sheer amount of lines, and the size of the sails was quite intimidating.

[JPA Cate]

You know, I've heard that 30% of the length before, but Jim and I sailed his 30 footer in 22 ft. seas, on a beam reach for quite a long while coming back to SF from HI in 1983. We were never close to being rolled. So I guess I question that rule of thumb. Perhaps rollability has more to do with design of the boat, how much ballast she carries, and exact point of sail. I wrote beam reaching, but it was actually fore-reaching, between 60 and 90 deg apparent, approx--it was a long time ago.

At least let me go on record as saying I did not at that time feel threatened. Seasick, well, yes, but not scared.

Ann

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by hamburking

Small boats are safe in storms because they act like a cork on the ocean. They get a lot of motion, but the internal forces on the hull, rigging, etc are minimal.

A larger boat (hull) bends and twists. The rig is exposed to heavy loads.

A small boat may be less comfortable, but is definitely safer.

Sorry cant help it, that's hilarious. So a bigger yachts rigging isnt designed for the large loads? Mate, in the middle of "s... hitting the fan" 48 or 26ft" there all corks!

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Like I wrote earlier on post #164.

My opinion comes from doing the same. Point of information: Small boats can't even make headway into winds and waves exceding 20 knots plus, hence.... the small craft warnings issued by the Coast Guard.

The example used above "I see small boats on the big boat" is just so absolutely ridiculous. Did it even dawn on you that the people who might need to get into one of those small boats, will eventually get picked up by another BIG boat? Or do you believe a fleet of Contessa 26 sailboats will be coming to the rescue?

Honestly..... where do some of you come up with these ideas?

You just cracked me up :-) im a picture guy and can see the fleet of Contessa 26's on the way....lol.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Sea Dreaming]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

You know, I've heard that 30% of the length before, but Jim and I sailed his 30 footer in 22 ft. seas, on a beam reach for quite a long while coming back to SF from HI in 1983. We were never close to being rolled. So I guess I question that rule of thumb. Perhaps rollability has more to do with design of the boat, how much ballast she carries, and exact point of sail. I wrote beam reaching, but it was actually fore-reaching, between 60 and 90 deg apparent, approx--it was a long time ago.

At least let me go on record as saying I did not at that time feel threatened. Seasick, well, yes, but not scared.

Ann

I think it's wave height 30% of length, breaking beam on. But I would guess boat design and how pissed Neptune is at you are factors.

[Hudson Force]

It seems to me that there are many safety factors ranked above the size of the vessel; such as hull construction, hull design, rigging, crew wisdom, and more.

I'll stick with the obvious advantages of a smaller boat; such as, purchase price, cost of maintenance, slip fees, ease of labor, and maneuverability.

It's also easy to recognize the obvious advantages of the big boats; such as comfort, storage of provisions, tankage, speed and accommodations.

Many people have done very well with both larger and smaller boats. It's an artificial concept to act as though there is a conflict between owning small and owning large.

[barnakiel]

A small boat is a light boat. You can only stuff as many pounds into the small craft before it sinks under its own displacement. Same applies to the big one, EXCEPT now there are more pounds ... The aaaaahhhhhhhh moment!

How easy it is for any given energy to roll over an object is related to how heavy the object is.

Hence, all other things equal, a small boat gets capsized before the bigger one does. If you are hesitating between a Bavaria 32 and a Bavaria 57 and if you want to sail where waves are big enough to capsize your boat, get the 57' model.

If you have the 32 model then it is still OK to sail it.

Regardless of which one you have, it is NOT OK to claim the smaller one is safer. Unless you want to fight gravity.

Don't you find it stupid that VOR boats are 65' and IMOCAs are 60'? Sure these idiots at big world races know nothing about safety of a craft in long ocean passages.

And can we please go back to ADVANTAGES? There are people in this thread who feel happier to discuss the DISADVANTAGES. Some masochists or something ;-)

Do not focus on safety and security too much. Sailing is not banking. You will lose sight of FUN in no time.

b.
from aboard his utterly unseaworthy, insecure and unsafe 26' boat that rolls like hell; because this is what I have got

[Cadence]

Just as a point. A relationship between beam and wave height for going turtle is very loose.
It is the relationship between the center of gravity and the center of buoyancy that is important.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Cadence

Just as a point. A relationship between beam and wave height for going turtle is very loose.
It is the relationship between the center of gravity and the center of buoyancy that is important.

True.. I laid ahull for 5 days W of Flores in 60+kt winds.. Cherurbini 37.. got picked up and tossed a few times but never close to rolling.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

from aboard his utterly unseaworthy, insecure and unsafe 26' boat that rolls like hell; because this is what I have got

May one enquire as to the make and displacement of this 'unsafe, unseaworthy little cork..'

[hamburking]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

So.... the two of you seem to be suggesting that a Contessa 26 is somehow more seaworthy and safer than the Queen Mary II. Really???

...lets just ask any of the survivors of the Titanic for their opinion...

YES. A contessa 26 is definitely SAFER than the QM2...but a lot less comfortable.

When was the last time a Contessa 26 was on the 11oclock news?

[hamburking]

Originally Posted by tuffr2

I may be wrong but I think I heard a wave 1/3 the length of the boat can capsize the boat. So a 60' boat could be capsized by a 20' wave a 30' boat could be capsized by a 10' wave.

Now, not sure if this takes into consideration the way the wave hits the boat. Or is this formula is for a head on wave?

IMHO, the steepness (or period) of the wave is relevant too. For example, a large, long ocean swell is unlikely to capsize anyone...although it is particularly unpleasant on most sailboats, regardless of size.

You would need a steep wave, like a sunami perhaps, to capsize a sailboat.

I had my C&C27 out in massive waves. Big north wind and me trying to enter the Niagara river on a run. Imagine all the water of niagara falls (both of em) flowing north over the niagara bar, opposed by 40 knots of wind (with a 20 mile fetch) pushing south. Huge standing waves. At the crest the speed impeller, adjacent to the keel, was fully out of the water (reading zero), then as we slide down the other side, it maxes out at 10 knots for a few moments before the bow buries into the trough and we do it all again. The wife, in tears below, trying to brace herself as the dog flies through the air again and again. Me spinning the wheel trying to get to the mouth of the river without slamming into the bar.

But rollover? Never occurred to me. A violent ride, yes, I could hear the bulkheads tearing themselves from the hull, but aside from the thought of hitting the bottom, I trusted the boat.

I don't want to speculate on the size of those waves, because as time goes by they seem bigger and bigger in my memory, but they were at least the size (length) of the boat. At least. If you ask the (now ex) wife, I'm sure she would say double that.

[Pizzazz]

This thread is becoming ridiculous. Let me just remind you that the Coast Guard issues small craft advisories (SCA). There must be a reason for that naming convention.

Part of good seamanship is to know the limitations of the boat, crew and captain. In SCA conditions, a bigger boat is always more comfortable. In gale/storm conditions you are rolling the dice irrespective of the boat short of an aircraft carrier.

[boatman61]

The CG issues small craft advisories because there are so many dickheads out there in dory's etc who have not a clue about the dangers and get into trouble in Pamlico Sound and similar places.. just have to read some of the questions/tales that pop up on CF to realise that..
Possibly I made the mistake of assuming this thread was seeking the opinion of seamen who go out on the oceans.. in which case my apologies..