• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Sign in to follow this  
dogedog

Cruising a foiler?

Recommended Posts

Nice vid... but not pertinent

 

I like KIS's Catalina Challenge parameters since they are appropriate to most of us in this conversation. My MC 38 fills the bill quite nicely but cost a factor more than a Catalina 36. (but money is not part of the conversation--currently)

 

However..

 

I do find myself attracted to the more modern genre of boats such as the Pogo. Even the little 30 might be a really nice 'cruiser'. I could be tempted and performance will far outpace the Catalina. Easier and cheaper to buy, sail, moor and maintain than even my boat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Wess, would you honestly take your family offshore in this?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-DXEzfPaxU

 

No.

 

But you guys keep moving the bar. The question posed was would I take it anywhere the Catalina 36 went and on Kent's defined cruise?

 

And HELL YES to that. Made a bit of an effort to do exactly that (w original, not F4) as did others round these parts.

 

And I would have jumped at the chance to have been part of the team that did the delivery of the G4 back to NC which was offshore.

Wise words from the skip, 'No matter what, Mother Nature will decide at what level you operate'

 

You guys wanna play move the bar? Or redefine one man's definition of cruising for yours. Let's invite the Catalina out to a new challenge.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9KUQdbWUCgY

Since foiling multihulls and now semi-foiling monohulls are within current technology, I have to wonder where the long line of customers is at?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice vid... but not pertinent

 

I like KIS's Catalina Challenge parameters since they are appropriate to most of us in this conversation. My MC 38 fills the bill quite nicely but cost a factor more than a Catalina 36. (but money is not part of the conversation--currently)

 

However..

 

I do find myself attracted to the more modern genre of boats such as the Pogo. Even the little 30 might be a really nice 'cruiser'. I could be tempted and performance will far outpace the Catalina. Easier and cheaper to buy, sail, moor and maintain than even my boat...

 

 

i'd be very happy with a Pogo, or a Bieker 35...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The title of the thread is "Cruising a Foiler". If the term "cruiser" is intended to be a local weekender, then sure the F4 would probably be a hoot but for a lot less money I can buy an old Bertram with lots of room and nice big engines that will be quicker, more comfortable and the price of a decades worth of fuel will be less then the sails hanging from the F4's spar.

 

When I think of a cruising I think of travelling further then a weekender and being in open water where help isn't within cell range. So, will an F4 be good for that or something like this?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmFh60wLjxw&list=PLQp8FoQ4t-lXnmXhIwsgq_9Lxqt3R6eDi&index=13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think scale matters a lot for useful and comfortable foiling so that the lifting surfaces are deep underwater and not much affected by waves. Similarly, the hull would lift clear out of the water so it also isn't affected by waves. This immediately takes it out of the market for family cruising but may have applications in fast commercial shipping or tourism. The fast hydrofoil tourist powerboats are an example of smooth, comfortable foiling. Similarly, smooth flying heavy lift aircraft like a 747 are not the market for Cessna hobbyists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be different in the USA but here most people cruise in sheltered waters and go in the open ocean only with a decent weather forecast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice vid... but not pertinent

 

I like KIS's Catalina Challenge parameters since they are appropriate to most of us in this conversation. My MC 38 fills the bill quite nicely but cost a factor more than a Catalina 36. (but money is not part of the conversation--currently)

 

However..

 

I do find myself attracted to the more modern genre of boats such as the Pogo. Even the little 30 might be a really nice 'cruiser'. I could be tempted and performance will far outpace the Catalina. Easier and cheaper to buy, sail, moor and maintain than even my boat...

 

 

i'd be very happy with a Pogo, or a Bieker 35...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The title of the thread is "Cruising a Foiler". If the term "cruiser" is intended to be a local weekender, then sure the F4 would probably be a hoot but for a lot less money I can buy an old Bertram with lots of room and nice big engines that will be quicker, more comfortable and the price of a decades worth of fuel will be less then the sails hanging from the F4's spar.

 

When I think of a cruising I think of travelling further then a weekender and being in open water where help isn't within cell range. So, will an F4 be good for that or something like this?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmFh60wLjxw&list=PLQp8FoQ4t-lXnmXhIwsgq_9Lxqt3R6eDi&index=13

Joli,

 

Any ocean going max trimaran will have to slow down to navigate these waters safely. Can it be done? Apparently. Would the G4 be ideal for this? Hell no. I'd rather be in your boat!

 

This vid might represent a comparatively small % of overall weather conditions a mariner/cruiser might face if given the luxury of waiting/predicting for weather. The questions then become, can a full foiler be dialled down to safely navigate extreme conditions in displacement mode? Can a semi foiler safely navigate these conditions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on the thread is just getting silly now.

 

The title of the thread is "Cruising a Foiler". If the term "cruiser" is intended to be a local weekender, then sure the F4 would probably be a hoot but for a lot less money I can buy an old Bertram with lots of room and nice big engines that will be quicker, more comfortable and the price of a decades worth of fuel will be less then the sails hanging from the F4's spar.

 

When I think of a cruising I think of travelling further then a weekender and being in open water where help isn't within cell range. So, will an F4 be good for that or something like this?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmFh60wLjxw&list=PLQp8FoQ4t-lXnmXhIwsgq_9Lxqt3R6eDi&index=13

Joli - You sail so know that statement is absurd. I used to run a Bertram out Barnegat to the Canyon. The price of fuel to run those things for just a weekend fishing trip was obscene compared to sail costs. And nobody said take an F4 offshore. It was used to answer Kent's question specifically. Fujin or Extreme H2O are better discussion points re offshore cruising.

 

 

 

 

Wess, would you honestly take your family offshore in this?

No.

But you guys keep moving the bar. The question posed was would I take it anywhere the Catalina 36 went and on Kent's defined cruise?

And HELL YES to that. Made a bit of an effort to do exactly that (w original, not F4) as did others round these parts.

And I would have jumped at the chance to have been part of the team that did the delivery of the G4 back to NC which was offshore.
Wise words from the skip, 'No matter what, Mother Nature will decide at what level you operate'

You guys wanna play move the bar? Or redefine one man's definition of cruising for yours. Let's invite the Catalina out to a new challenge.

Since foiling multihulls and now semi-foiling monohulls are within current technology, I have to wonder where the long line of customers is at?

 

Is this for real? The bar moves further. The thread asked would you cruise a foiler? Now its will there be a long line of customers to buy foiling offshore cruisers?

 

Get real. I can meet Kent's "cruise" challenge for $15K or less in a 4KSB non foiler so of course the longest line will be there and most in that line would not have the skills to sail a performance multihull; never mind one that foils.

 

I was asked if I would sail the F4 rather than a Catalina 36 on Kent's defined cruise. The answer is yes and if the boat was available absent cost considerations there would likely be a decent line of folks behind or in front of me. Pay full price and that line gets pretty short. But that's a price not a technology problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good questions Fufkin, I certainly can't answer them, I'm not even sure I want to be on an Atlantic 57 in those conditions. The question I always come back to is how can anyone be assured they won't be in those conditions when making a jump?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

R Koch,

 

I'll add a few things to your sparse list of trickle down items from the 80s ocean racers...plum bows and hard dodgers for starters.

 

Have they made their way into the mainstream? Yes and no and with limited relevance. The wave piercing bows finally announced their presence at the marina on various models in and around 07 to make sure that the Hanse/Bene crowd could feel relavant and look fast in their berths.

 

How many hard dodgers have made their way onto production boats? Not many. How many serious cruisers want one? I would think a lot of them.

 

Let's leave aside for the moment any piece of line, block, shackle, boom, spar or material that is lighter than it was in the 70s and allows for a better ballast ratio and stiffer ride and the ability to carry more. This would seem to address your automotive analogy. Most gains in automotive engine technology have gone to the ability to carry more bells and whistles rather than mileage gains.

 

So back to the OPs question of whether or not foils 'will make there way into' cruising, not whether it is here 'right now'

 

So no, no long line ups of customers just yet.

 

Trickledown all the way to the mainstream might take a long, long time. For custom or semi custom, maybe less. Look at something like the Sundeer series which incorporated gains and knowledge mainly from the cruising experience of a former catamaran racer. How many hulls? 10 or 15? Did it fill a niche for a small customer base? Sure. Was there trickle down from both race and cruising experience? Sure. Interesting how the performance cutter rig that 'those mags way back in the 80s said would be the next big thing' make so much sense on a cruiser. Who would've thunk it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The title of the thread is "Cruising a Foiler". If the term "cruiser" is intended to be a local weekender, then sure the F4 would probably be a hoot but for a lot less money I can buy an old Bertram with lots of room and nice big engines that will be quicker, more comfortable and the price of a decades worth of fuel will be less then the sails hanging from the F4's spar.

 

When I think of a cruising I think of travelling further then a weekender and being in open water where help isn't within cell range. So, will an F4 be good for that or something like this?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmFh60wLjxw&list=PLQp8FoQ4t-lXnmXhIwsgq_9Lxqt3R6eDi&index=13

I agree with Jolie here. A cruiser is not a weekender. IMO, a cruiser implies liveaboard capabilities for an extended period of time, the ability to stow necessary provisions, fuel, and equipment for that time, and the ability to deal with rough weather in relative safety. There are relatively few people like Webb Chiles willing to do so in a primitive manner. To me, they either are looking for a challange to conquer or are under severe financial limitations. But they don't represent typical cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice vid... but not pertinent

 

I like KIS's Catalina Challenge parameters since they are appropriate to most of us in this conversation. My MC 38 fills the bill quite nicely but cost a factor more than a Catalina 36. (but money is not part of the conversation--currently)

 

However..

 

I do find myself attracted to the more modern genre of boats such as the Pogo. Even the little 30 might be a really nice 'cruiser'. I could be tempted and performance will far outpace the Catalina. Easier and cheaper to buy, sail, moor and maintain than even my boat...

Veeger, do you think your MC38 would benefit from the rudders and partial lifting foils in some conditions? Better speed with a nicer motion and less load on fittings is what I imagine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kent Island Sailor,

 

I think the original design brief for the G4 was meant to do pretty well for your Catalina challenge. Initially it was meant to not fully foil for the average user but if dialled in by a team of pros, had the ability to fully foil. Along the way, I think things might of morphed into...'let's see what this thing can do...NOW.' During the very public testing and capsize, I think it was forgotten that the boat was meant to be sailed in semi displacement mode the vast majority of the time.

 

I might also put it out there(although it's a separate topic), that in the initial capsize of the G4, this was a 'DeadZone' error between the helmsman and the main trimmer that I'm not sure could be totally attributed to foiling. This error could've up ended a racing cat 40 years ago. IMHO (not so in AC foiling wipeouts etc.)

 

As for the livability quotient, all things being equal, I'd go for the outdoor removable galley/grill with a massive soft Bimini and tons of cockpit space over a Catalina galley anyday of the week if you were to hand me the keys to either.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't you buy use C36, sail it all summer and sink it instead of hauling it, then start the next year with a new one...for a decade or two...before you've spent what that G4 would set you back?

 

Part of the accessibility of foiling is lifestyle, but part is affordability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thus the Catalina 36 challenge. If cruising means anything from "can spend the night under a boon tent" to "ready to round Cape Horn in comfort as delivered", then the word "cruiser" means nothing.

I think we all know taking the wife and kids across an ocean foiling at 20 knots is not happening anytime soon. I want to know if the wife and kids can foil over to Saint Michaels for a few days without ending up capsized or having a mutiny ;)

 

The title of the thread is "Cruising a Foiler". If the term "cruiser" is intended to be a local weekender, then sure the F4 would probably be a hoot but for a lot less money I can buy an old Bertram with lots of room and nice big engines that will be quicker, more comfortable and the price of a decades worth of fuel will be less then the sails hanging from the F4's spar.

When I think of a cruising I think of travelling further then a weekender and being in open water where help isn't within cell range. So, will an F4 be good for that or something like this?

I agree with Jolie here. A cruiser is not a weekender. IMO, a cruiser implies liveaboard capabilities for an extended period of time, the ability to stow necessary provisions, fuel, and equipment for that time, and the ability to deal with rough weather in relative safety. There are relatively few people like Webb Chiles willing to do so in a primitive manner. To me, they either are looking for a challange to conquer or are under severe financial limitations. But they don't represent typical cruisers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Veeger, do you think your MC38 would benefit from the rudders and partial lifting foils in some conditions? Better speed with a nicer motion and less load on fittings is what I imagine.

 

 

Not enough time with it yet. My gut says it would need to be much lighter. It's already pretty light, but my sense is that foiling still requires one or both of the following: A) Very light weight B)Routinely able to bust through 10-12 knots boat speed while dragging oversize foils before being able to ride on said foils

 

Not being a graduate of SOFT (School of Foil Theory), I'm not really able to comment intelligently, especially regarding a sort of semi-displacement foiling assist type setup. Since the big boys are using them either in the Vendee or the S2H, there's seemingly some benefit but ALL of these monohulls move well over 15 knots and up anyway (see Requirement B above)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is part II, can it be done affordably.

To be fair - ANY new boat fairs poorly when reasonably seaworthy used boats are going begging.

A high tech carbon multi is going to be on the high end of the high end boats for a long time to come.

 

Kent Island Sailor,

I think the original design brief for the G4 was meant to do pretty well for your Catalina challenge. Initially it was meant to not fully foil for the average user but if dialled in by a team of pros, had the ability to fully foil. Along the way, I think things might of morphed into...'let's see what this thing can do...NOW.' During the very public testing and capsize, I think it was forgotten that the boat was meant to be sailed in semi displacement mode the vast majority of the time.

I might also put it out there(although it's a separate topic), that in the initial capsize of the G4, this was a 'DeadZone' error between the helmsman and the main trimmer that I'm not sure could be totally attributed to foiling. This error could've up ended a racing cat 40 years ago. IMHO (not so in AC foiling wipeouts etc.)

As for the livability quotient, all things being equal, I'd go for the outdoor removable galley/grill with a massive soft Bimini and tons of cockpit space over a Catalina galley anyday of the week if you were to hand me the keys to either.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't you buy use C36, sail it all summer and sink it instead of hauling it, then start the next year with a new one...for a decade or two...before you've spent what that G4 would set you back?

 

Part of the accessibility of foiling is lifestyle, but part is affordability.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not read the thread in great detail, and I am perhaps going to repeat what has already been said.

 

Most people here seem to connect foils with extremely light and fast boats, and are sceptical about their potential for cruising. Fair enough, I am sceptical as well.

 

My take is somewhat different. The foils on the VG boats provide additional righting moment. You can use that additional righting moment to carry more sail area and go faster, as the VG boats do. But perhaps that you could use foils to carry the same sail area and reduce the heel angle instead. I think a lot of cruisers would really love it if foils would allow them to beat upwind at a similar speed as today but with an angle of heel of say 15° instead of 25°. However, I have no idea whether it is possible to design functional foils that would operate at much slower speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not read the thread in great detail, and I am perhaps going to repeat what has already been said.

 

Most people here seem to connect foils with extremely light and fast boats, and are sceptical about their potential for cruising. Fair enough, I am sceptical as well.

 

My take is somewhat different. The foils on the VG boats provide additional righting moment. You can use that additional righting moment to carry more sail area and go faster, as the VG boats do. But perhaps that you could use foils to carry the same sail area and reduce the heel angle instead. I think a lot of cruisers would really love it if foils would allow them to beat upwind at a similar speed as today but with an angle of heel of say 15° instead of 25°. However, I have no idea whether it is possible to design functional foils that would operate at much slower speeds.

To generate RM at 6 knots the foils would have to be a large area and rather thick. That would be a fair amount of drag when not needed, which means there would have to be a retracting mechanism and fairly large trunks in the interior to house them (also required for lying alongside a dock). I doubt that would be acceptable to most cruisers, in addition to the cost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not read the thread in great detail, and I am perhaps going to repeat what has already been said.

 

Most people here seem to connect foils with extremely light and fast boats, and are sceptical about their potential for cruising. Fair enough, I am sceptical as well.

 

My take is somewhat different. The foils on the VG boats provide additional righting moment. You can use that additional righting moment to carry more sail area and go faster, as the VG boats do. But perhaps that you could use foils to carry the same sail area and reduce the heel angle instead. I think a lot of cruisers would really love it if foils would allow them to beat upwind at a similar speed as today but with an angle of heel of say 15° instead of 25°. However, I have no idea whether it is possible to design functional foils that would operate at much slower speeds.

'Side foils' (like those upside down whiskers on the 2017 Figaro boats) convert that increased righting moment into forward motion and so increased speed, not sure it possible to separate the two functions. I think they also require heel to dig in on leeward only (or you just produce drag with the windward foil which is counter productive). (I mention them because they are prototypes for future fast cruisers)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the realities of being a cruiser is that even for ocean crossing cruisers, the amount of time underway AND sailing (as opposed to underway and motoring) is a relatively small percentage of the time that cruisers spend using their boats. Making significant sacrifices of money, accommodations, complexity, weight management, etc, etc for a small subset of their boating time simply isn't worth the gains. By definition, cruising is about much more than speed or even solely sailing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Veeger, do you think your MC38 would benefit from the rudders and partial lifting foils in some conditions? Better speed with a nicer motion and less load on fittings is what I imagine.

Not enough time with it yet. My gut says it would need to be much lighter. It's already pretty light, but my sense is that foiling still requires one or both of the following: A) Very light weight B)Routinely able to bust through 10-12 knots boat speed while dragging oversize foils before being able to ride on said foils

 

Not being a graduate of SOFT (School of Foil Theory), I'm not really able to comment intelligently, especially regarding a sort of semi-displacement foiling assist type setup. Since the big boys are using them either in the Vendee or the S2H, there's seemingly some benefit but ALL of these monohulls move well over 15 knots and up anyway (see Requirement B above)

My thoughts, from sailing a somewhat similar cat, is that breezy reaching and upwind would benefit from well developed foils, especially when the boat is full of fluids and junk. Uphill, to ease some of the surging as each hull punches through a swell, reaching to lift the bows and stop the big deceleration loads when you run into the next wave. Our napkin designs and budgets make adding 4' on the back and a bit of a bow extension, coupled with more efficient straight boards a better idea all round

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the realities of being a cruiser is that even for ocean crossing cruisers, the amount of time underway AND sailing (as opposed to underway and motoring) is a relatively small percentage of the time that cruisers spend using their boats. Making significant sacrifices of money, accommodations, complexity, weight management, etc, etc for a small subset of their boating time simply isn't worth the gains. By definition, cruising is about much more than speed or even solely sailing.

I suspect you're onto something in a central tenancy of the population kind of way. However, as a statement of absolutes, your assertion is false.

 

Perhaps it's because I've cruised a bit on a reasonably fast boat that I've run into lots of folks who cruise fast boats. Folks who don't motor much or at all on passage and day sail often in the places that they voyage to. Folks who are willing to pay a bit more in comfort and or cash to have cruising boats that are fun to sail. I suspect if I motored around in a Nordhavn I'd see a lot of motor cruisers. Seems likely that if you sit at anchor in Noumea and you speak English you're going to over sample anzacs who sail slow boats and under sample folks who are out sailing in the lagoon. Since my tastes run to being out sailing I'm sure I make the opposite error. However, if you open your eyes to them I think you'll find folks in fast boats, handy boats, small boats, light boats, engineless boats and lots of other types of craft that don't seem to fit the circular definition of cruising boat that's going around here out there doing what I think of as cruising and voyaging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

One of the realities of being a cruiser is that even for ocean crossing cruisers, the amount of time underway AND sailing (as opposed to underway and motoring) is a relatively small percentage of the time that cruisers spend using their boats. Making significant sacrifices of money, accommodations, complexity, weight management, etc, etc for a small subset of their boating time simply isn't worth the gains. By definition, cruising is about much more than speed or even solely sailing.

I suspect you're onto something in a central tenancy of the population kind of way. However, as a statement of absolutes, your assertion is false.

 

Perhaps it's because I've cruised a bit on a reasonably fast boat that I've run into lots of folks who cruise fast boats. Folks who don't motor much or at all on passage and day sail often in the places that they voyage to. Folks who are willing to pay a bit more in comfort and or cash to have cruising boats that are fun to sail. I suspect if I motored around in a Nordhavn I'd see a lot of motor cruisers. Seems likely that if you sit at anchor in Noumea and you speak English you're going to over sample anzacs who sail slow boats and under sample folks who are out sailing in the lagoon. Since my tastes run to being out sailing I'm sure I make the opposite error. However, if you open your eyes to them I think you'll find folks in fast boats, handy boats, small boats, light boats, engineless boats and lots of other types of craft that don't seem to fit the circular definition of cruising boat that's going around here out there doing what I think of as cruising and voyaging.

 

 

 

 

False---ooph, that's a bit harsh :o . 'not always true'--I'll go with that.

 

Anyway, I'm one of those who sails like yourself. Performance IS fun, I've been known to go out and totally drift in circles for as long as 3 hours waiting on a zephyr while on a daysail without turning the 'key' on my auxiliary power! I threw in the 'ocean crossing' cruisers because most everyone understands that time in port far outweighs time underway. However, my thoughts go to my own experience and observations with 'our' type of cruiser. But, if you do the math you'll probably find that we STILL spend more time on our boats secured to a dock, mooring buoy or anchor than we do sailing.

 

Whether it's 'why more cruisers don't race' or 'what's a real cruiser', there is no absolute, all inclusive Truth apart from the fact that every one of us enjoys being on the water propelled by wind. Mostly, I'm responding/agreeing that recreational sailors who spend days and nights on their boats are more inclined to accept/use what's available and popular today than be a part of the leading edge types who will go for foils. Their 'itch' has already been scratched.

 

You and I would be more likely to try a foiling cruiser than most.

 

(Hmmm if money were just laying around and I didn't need to do heavy mods, I might like that idea of changing out to lifting foils on my boat.... For sure, smoothing out an upwind bash WOULD be worthwhile!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

False---ooph, that's a bit harsh :o . 'not always true'--I'll go with that.

Sorry about that. "Not always true" is exactly what I was trying to get at in my inelegant way.

 

I've been known to go out and totally drift in circles for as long as 3 hours waiting on a zephyr while on a daysail without turning the 'key' on my auxiliary power!

I've been known to take 30 days to sail from NZ to Hawaii because I rather sail than motor... There's no accounting for tastes. ;) But I have met other people out there with my affliction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

False---ooph, that's a bit harsh :o . 'not always true'--I'll go with that.

Sorry about that. "Not always true" is exactly what I was trying to get at in my inelegant way.

 

I've been known to go out and totally drift in circles for as long as 3 hours waiting on a zephyr while on a daysail without turning the 'key' on my auxiliary power!

I've been known to take 30 days to sail from NZ to Hawaii because I rather sail than motor... There's no accounting for tastes. ;) But I have met other people out there with my affliction.

 

 

 

True. But we're a minority...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

False---ooph, that's a bit harsh :o . 'not always true'--I'll go with that.

Sorry about that. "Not always true" is exactly what I was trying to get at in my inelegant way.

 

I've been known to go out and totally drift in circles for as long as 3 hours waiting on a zephyr while on a daysail without turning the 'key' on my auxiliary power!

I've been known to take 30 days to sail from NZ to Hawaii because I rather sail than motor... There's no accounting for tastes. ;) But I have met other people out there with my affliction.

 

 

 

True. But we're a minority...

 

 

I am not sure that you are such a minority. Many don't have that much diesel on board and can't motor for more than 3 or 4 days. If you do a long crossing you will have to mostly sail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on some great comments it does seem that maybe the "side foils" is the possible next step for a cruiser over true stand up foiling. But they supposedly take up a lot of interior space when not deployed so that might be a deal killer...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on some great comments it does seem that maybe the "side foils" is the possible next step for a cruiser over true stand up foiling. But they supposedly take up a lot of interior space when not deployed so that might be a deal killer...

 

There might be a way to integrate them in the interior. It is sometimes done well one some boats with lifting keels/daggerboards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is I think proving one of my original points, that there's no universal definition of what "cruising" is or entails. I know what it means to me, and I'm quite certain that the boats that have spent months getting to the Bahamas and the Caribbean from the east coast and Canada qualify as Cruisers, and there's a wide, wide variety of boats (sail and power) and crews on the hook throughout the region right now. I don't recall seeing any light weight flyers in George Town, Exuma at all last week...but I'm more than happy to admit that what I've described is NOT the only kind of activity that could reasonably be described as cruising. It's a big tent.

 

Soooo, and I don't intend to prolong the beating of this horse beyond this post, IMHO "foiling" (whether hulls out of the water or for stability) will indeed be seen on some boats intended for uses other than racing, with bunks, galleys, dinghies, water and fuel tankage, yadda, yadda, and some people will find these boats a perfect fit for their intended use, which they may well describe as cruising. How many? At what price point? Over what time frame? What long term maintenance issues and costs? Got me, but I know that just about every technology that bubbles up gets tried out and either sinks, swims, and/or leads to further evolution. I'm good with that, so to all you future foiling cruisers, good luck and please keep us posted!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many? At what price point? Over what time frame? What long term maintenance issues and costs? Got me, but I know that just about every technology that bubbles up gets tried out and either sinks, swims, and/or leads to further evolution. I'm good with that, so to all you future foiling cruisers, good luck and please keep us posted!

I am taking for granted this thread is primarily about monohulls, and foil assist to increase righting moment, and forward motion/.

How many? hundreds this year, thousands within a decade

At what price point? full range, but of course, will first appear on high end fast cruisers (see Beneteau figaro design for 2017 further up thread)

Over what time frame? the coming decade starting early 2018 (right now if pure long distance 30ft racing cruisers are counted)

What long term maintenance issues and costs? few if any, or at least, until a foil breaks, then you will need good insurance. Oh and marina parking etiquette, "sorry, didn't mean to poke you with my foil!"

Aesthetics? Ugly appendage or charming spurs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I am taking for granted this thread is primarily about monohulls,

 

 

Why?

 

The technology is more easily applied to light-weight craft and that suggests a multi, no? Less intrusive and more easily adopted as well I would think??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I am taking for granted this thread is primarily about monohulls,

 

 

Why?

 

The technology is more easily applied to light-weight craft and that suggests a multi, no? Less intrusive and more easily adopted as well I would think??

 

My reasoning (and that of the sailboat industry of you look at what is happening) is one of risk management. Losing a foil on a monohull should not pose a risk of capsize or taking on water, the opposite is not true of multihulls. That isn't to say foils are not appearing on production multihulls, they are, but look at the crews they carry. Show me a foiling (cruising) multihull with a washing machine and aircon that can be singlehanded....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is I think proving one of my original points, that there's no universal definition of what "cruising" is or entails.

 

 

After my my postings and reading what others have written, I think its important to distinct between the verb "to cruise" and the noun "cruising sailboat/cruiser".

 

As demonstrated by posters above, you can cruise (verb) most anything as long as you can tolerate the accommodations or lack thereof.

 

But to be a "cruiser" or cruising sailboat" (noun), I think there are some fairly specific minimum requirements to be called that; marketing speak aside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This thread is I think proving one of my original points, that there's no universal definition of what "cruising" is or entails.

 

 

After my my postings and reading what others have written, I think its important to distinct between the verb "to cruise" and the noun "cruising sailboat/cruiser".

 

As demonstrated by posters above, you can cruise (verb) most anything as long as you can tolerate the accommodations or lack thereof.

 

But to be a "cruiser" or cruising sailboat" (noun), I think there are some fairly specific minimum requirements to be called that; marketing speak aside.

 

to cruise refers to seedy blokes driving around back streets in hope of a chance encounter?

a cruising sailboat is one that people can (safely) voyage (non-competitively) upon for an extended period with a reasonable amount of autonomy (a month's worth of provisions). Plenty of scope in that, but it does mean, plenty of weight. (lightweight and cruising are contradictory terms, aren't they?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I am taking for granted this thread is primarily about monohulls,

 

 

 

Why?

 

The technology is more easily applied to light-weight craft and that suggests a multi, no? Less intrusive and more easily adopted as well I would think??

 

My reasoning (and that of the sailboat industry of you look at what is happening) is one of risk management. Losing a foil on a monohull should not pose a risk of capsize or taking on water, the opposite is not true of multihulls. That isn't to say foils are not appearing on production multihulls, they are, but look at the crews they carry. Show me a foiling (cruising) multihull with a washing machine and aircon that can be singlehanded....

 

Guess you have kinda lost me. If limited to boats you will find in a cruising anchorage, I think we are seeing greater use of lifting foils on multis than monos... never mind risk management.

 

Anyway, a bit off topic, as I think we will see increasing use in both platforms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is part II, can it be done affordably.

To be fair - ANY new boat fairs poorly when reasonably seaworthy used boats are going begging.

A high tech carbon multi is going to be on the high end of the high end boats for a long time to come.

 

 

Kent Island Sailor,

I think the original design brief for the G4 was meant to do pretty well for your Catalina challenge. Initially it was meant to not fully foil for the average user but if dialled in by a team of pros, had the ability to fully foil. Along the way, I think things might of morphed into...'let's see what this thing can do...NOW.' During the very public testing and capsize, I think it was forgotten that the boat was meant to be sailed in semi displacement mode the vast majority of the time.

I might also put it out there(although it's a separate topic), that in the initial capsize of the G4, this was a 'DeadZone' error between the helmsman and the main trimmer that I'm not sure could be totally attributed to foiling. This error could've up ended a racing cat 40 years ago. IMHO (not so in AC foiling wipeouts etc.)

As for the livability quotient, all things being equal, I'd go for the outdoor removable galley/grill with a massive soft Bimini and tons of cockpit space over a Catalina galley anyday of the week if you were to hand me the keys to either.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but couldn't you buy use C36, sail it all summer and sink it instead of hauling it, then start the next year with a new one...for a decade or two...before you've spent what that G4 would set you back?

 

Part of the accessibility of foiling is lifestyle, but part is affordability.

At the moment, affordability is limited to those with deep pockets. There's a C-class development/build/race program a a couple hundred yards from my boat. I'm not sure where they're at right now but safe to say >1 million per annum budget (including regatta costs) for many years now. They've learned a lot in this time and I think across the board foilers have made great leaps. Entry level into the very vibrant Moth community is a fraction, but admittedly doesn't relate to the cruising question. The price of just one foil on a G4 would keep a Catalina 36 owner going for many years.

 

Is there an 'affordable' foiling option for cruising out there right now? Not that I know of...don't know anything about the new Figaro but looks like they're gonna give it a go.

 

Suppose though, a customer walks up to the cashiers desk at say...the Seascape booth at the boat show in say...5 years time with a couple hundred grand burning a hole in his pocket. Could a builder offer a foil assisted 27/30 footer for that? Are the gains worth it? Would the foils render the interior on a boat this size semi useless? Is it sensible to go to 40...50 feet to offset the loss of interior space for a cruiser? A brand new 50 foot anything in this day and age starts to look like 3/4 million pretty fast. So what is affordable?

 

The Catalina wins this part of the challenge at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the thousands of owners of canting keel cruising boats are dying to go 10% faster. Anyone is guaranteed a small fortune supplying the market with cruising foilers...provided they start with a large one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the thousands of owners of canting keel cruising boats are dying to go 10% faster. Anyone is guaranteed a small fortune supplying the market with cruising foilers...provided they start with a large one.

A couple of years ago at the Ft. Lauderdale boat show I struggled to find one 'mainstream' sailboat builder among the 4.5 billion dollars worth of product on display. You might apply this to entering the cruising/build market in general.

 

Anyway, lots of cruisers out there with dagger boards which are closer cousins to the types of foils being discussed than a canting keel.

 

But wait, don't you think there's a sizeable untapped market for canting keel cruisers that want to reduce their draft from 15 feet to 9 feet to get into some of those more desirable anchorages?...?...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This thread is I think proving one of my original points, that there's no universal definition of what "cruising" is or entails.

 

 

After my my postings and reading what others have written, I think its important to distinct between the verb "to cruise" and the noun "cruising sailboat/cruiser".

 

As demonstrated by posters above, you can cruise (verb) most anything as long as you can tolerate the accommodations or lack thereof.

 

But to be a "cruiser" or cruising sailboat" (noun), I think there are some fairly specific minimum requirements to be called that; marketing speak aside.

 

to cruise refers to seedy blokes driving around back streets in hope of a chance encounter?

a cruising sailboat is one that people can (safely) voyage (non-competitively) upon for an extended period with a reasonable amount of autonomy (a month's worth of provisions). Plenty of scope in that, but it does mean, plenty of weight. (lightweight and cruising are contradictory terms, aren't they?)

 

 

This one is light and has cruised round the pacific :

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks pretty adventurous (and fun) to me. But I can't see that proa taking off on foils with my requisite genset and 300 gallons of diesel fuel on board! (never mind the jacuzzi)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks pretty adventurous (and fun) to me. But I can't see that proa taking off on foils with my requisite genset and 300 gallons of diesel fuel on board! (never mind the jacuzzi)

 

That's your style of cruising and obviously if you accept to lug around all this weight, you are probably better off with a metal boat but it doesn't mean that nobody will go the lightweight route.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

All the thousands of owners of canting keel cruising boats are dying to go 10% faster. Anyone is guaranteed a small fortune supplying the market with cruising foilers...provided they start with a large one.

A couple of years ago at the Ft. Lauderdale boat show I struggled to find one 'mainstream' sailboat builder among the 4.5 billion dollars worth of product on display. You might apply this to entering the cruising/build market in general.

 

Anyway, lots of cruisers out there with dagger boards which are closer cousins to the types of foils being discussed than a canting keel.

 

But wait, don't you think there's a sizeable untapped market for canting keel cruisers that want to reduce their draft from 15 feet to 9 feet to get into some of those more desirable anchorages?...?...

Yes and no. There is a market segment desiring shoal draft. Generally this is met with shoal draft keels, sometimes with wings, although wings seem to be falling out of favor. Daggerboards and lifting keels are still popular for trailerable boats. Pogos do have a market niche for swing keels. Keel Centerboards appear to have generally fallen out of favor for some reason. However, foils aren't for the purpose of shoal draft, they're to increase speed. That is also the function of canting keels and water ballast. Despite Procyon appearing at numerous boat shows 20+ years ago as the 'future' of performance cruising sailboats, there wasn't even a market nibble at canting keels. Water ballast only made its way to a couple trailer sailer models, more to reduce tow vehicle requirements than to increase performance. Consumers for cruising boats simply were interested in other features over performance. If there was a demand for performance, then there's already existing technology...which the market has generally ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Looks pretty adventurous (and fun) to me. But I can't see that proa taking off on foils with my requisite genset and 300 gallons of diesel fuel on board! (never mind the jacuzzi)

That's your style of cruising and obviously if you accept to lug around all this weight, you are probably better off with a metal boat but it doesn't mean that nobody will go the lightweight route.

Good for him. I know a guy who rode a motorcycle cross country. That doesn't mean there's a revolution coming in the RV industry.

Webb Chiles sailed an open 18' boat around the world...doesn't prove the case of there being a market for open 18' world cruisers.

There's always going to be a handfull of people doing their own thing. I think that's great. But it doesn't make the case that the majority of people are going to take the same course. If there was a market demand for lightweight performance cruising boats with relatively primitive accomodations, I guarantee the boat manufacturers would be falling all over themselves to deliver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RKoch,

 

I was joking about the canting keel. I used to do some coachboat and shore crew work for an Open 60. She arrived with no keel. Once the keel was on, it had somewhere around a 15 ft draught and we had to cant the keel slightly to get here through a shallow pass on the way to her 'berth'. I've seen these beasts up close and personal and realize their limitations as an everyday 'cruiser'. Draught would be probably one of the biggest.

 

I hear you on the niche market for swing keels (beachable, knockable) and lifting keels for trailerability etc. Look at some of the recent offerings in the 'sportboat' market. I know there's a small appetite for this kind of thing that has been marketed as offshore/inshore. The Columbia 32, with lifting keel, retractable sail drive etcetera looked like a great design and had some takers...then lost its rudder. I personally question whether these boats are up to the task of what there being marketed as...but maybe this type of market segment might develop foil assist.

 

As for water ballast, I know a shock 40 owner(not really a cruiser)who has it, know of a kanter 63 with it, and know of some Sundeers that had it. The word was that it could provide maybe a small comfort gain(%5 less heel) with the Sundeers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the thousands of owners of canting keel cruising boats are dying to go 10% faster. Anyone is guaranteed a small fortune supplying the market with cruising foilers...provided they start with a large one.

Have you ever owned and cruised per the definition you keep using? On a multi? Not intended as a criticism just don't understand your logic.

 

For what its worth my wife and I have owned and cruised as a couple per any definition used in this thread on both multis and monos. Cruised w kids as well on another boat if you accept coastal in place of offshore cruising. So why would I never put a canting keel or a lifting foil in my cruising monohull, but would put a lifting foil in my multihull....

 

Because if I wanted the 10% improvement you quote with a canting keel in my monohull, I could get far more improvement, less complexity, and added safety, by switching to a multihull (more room as well). Equally I would not add a foil to a cruising monohull because its an additional critical failure point that has the potential to hole the boat and lead to sinking for marginal gain given I am adding that technology to a led sled which I purchased because performance was not a primary concern but ability to carry load (likely) was. Lifting keel to access anchorage... maybe... but canting keel I could never imagine making sense on a cruising monohull given the many more effective ways to improve performance. I bought a cruising monohull and not a multi specifically because performance was not a primary driver.

 

Now on the other hand if I bought a performance multihull - not a wedding cake maran, and believe it or not there are lots of performance multis out cruising - I have made the decision to minimize weight and load carrying in favor of improved performance. To switch from fixed keels to dagger boards on a cruising multi is an easy decision and something you see with ever increasing frequency. To take it a step further, to switch out from straight (dagger) boards to lifting boards / foils is an equally easy decision that you already see happening. No added risk (assuming engineered properly) and the potential for improved speed, or safety, or seakindliness depending how designed and intended.

 

Of course there is never going to be a long line. There will always be more monos than multis cruising (that price thing), and few yet performance multis (price again and accessibility/skill) where adding lifting foils (or full foiling capability) makes sense.

 

Doubt we see foiling monohull cruisers (even just lifting foils). But we already see lifting foils in cruising multis (off-shore multis) and I am guessing you will see full foiling capable coastal/near shore multis as well. At least that is my guess. A slow but steady evolution and adoption in multis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RKoch, I think that you are moving the goalpost by saying the "vast majority". Nowadays you can go to Outremer and buy a fairly swift and lightweight catamaran suitable for offshore cruising. Obviously Outremer owners are not the majority but if you want to cruise fairly swiftly you can find a catamaran that will do the job. For some the compromise that this choice implies is worthwile the extra speed and the shallower draught. It happened in the late 80s early 90s about 10-15 years after the heroic days of modern offshore racing multihulls. These catamarans don't look like their racing cousins but still have some of their features.

 

I can imagine that in 10 years there will be a relatively modest yard like Outremer that will do cruising boats that use a foil to make them better. Better is yet to define, it might be extra speed or extra comfort. I quite like Numawan idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he is just being deliberately obtuse. Just look at the recent troubles/failure of Pacific Seacraft and Island Packet and the long standing success and expansion of Outremer. His dinosaurs are starting to feel some heat, LOL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite a trip on a small hydrofoiling (?) tri/ Though we don't know how much of the time the foils were in use. In the first video I am not sure what the foils are achieving? Still great looking boat, which in my book, counts for a lot :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the realities of being a cruiser is that even for ocean crossing cruisers, the amount of time underway AND sailing (as opposed to underway and motoring) is a relatively small percentage of the time that cruisers spend using their boats. Making significant sacrifices of money, accommodations, complexity, weight management, etc, etc for a small subset of their boating time simply isn't worth the gains. By definition, cruising is about much more than speed or even solely sailing.

 

Kind of my point earlier, but more succinctly put.

 

It's not worth giving up on my fuel range, food storage, tools, spares, etc. to eliminate a few days of sailing a year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uh, y'all might want to do a bit of research and think a bit before hooking your foiling star to Catri. Very DLish. Just sayin...

 

Kochy is likely laughing his pinched IOR stern off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

One of the realities of being a cruiser is that even for ocean crossing cruisers, the amount of time underway AND sailing (as opposed to underway and motoring) is a relatively small percentage of the time that cruisers spend using their boats. Making significant sacrifices of money, accommodations, complexity, weight management, etc, etc for a small subset of their boating time simply isn't worth the gains. By definition, cruising is about much more than speed or even solely sailing.

 

Kind of my point earlier, but more succinctly put.

 

It's not worth giving up on my fuel range, food storage, tools, spares, etc. to eliminate a few days of sailing a year.

 

Different stokes.

 

IIRC, you're in New Cal? I've had wonderful times sailing all around that place in my cruising boat. It has some of the best day sailing in the world IMHO. Having a boat that's a blast to sail in the places I get to has been a joy for me. Dropping a day off a passage isn't often a big deal. Nobody is giving out prizes. Engines are a great performance equalizer on many passages, too. For me, the fun is having the performance for the day sails and short passages. For just getting from place to place motoring makes much more sense and being inside out of the weather to do it is best. But then, why sail at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he is just being deliberately obtuse. Just look at the recent troubles/failure of Pacific Seacraft and Island Packet and the long standing success and expansion of Outremer. His dinosaurs are starting to feel some heat, LOL.

Not just IP, but Hunter (builders of inexpensive 'cruisers'), and Gunboat (builder of high-end performance cruising multihulls). Bene is possibly only staying afloat through subsidies.

I wouldn't say any is my ideal 'cruising boat'...I wouldn't say I even have an ideal cruising boat. What I would pick for a blue-water cruiser isn't at all what I would pick for a coastal cruiser. And neither might be a nice weekender.

I have done quite a few miles on a large variety of boats...racing, cruising, and deliveries. I see what people are buying, and what they're chartering. The big trends I've seen are towards easier sail and anchor handling, more room, more luxury features and the systems to power them, and of course there's always cost pressures. Performance features like canting keels, water ballast, and foils are at odds with what the general market place wants in cruising boats. The people who are pushing them aren't currently cruising in a performance boat and are seeking even greater performance. In fact, I doubt they have any financial means at all. Until DL writes an actual check, the industry will ignore him. The builders are going to build what people with checkbooks in hand want to buy. . At the moment, and for the foreseeable future, that's going to be floating condos whether we like it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think he is just being deliberately obtuse. Just look at the recent troubles/failure of Pacific Seacraft and Island Packet and the long standing success and expansion of Outremer. His dinosaurs are starting to feel some heat, LOL.

Not just IP, but Hunter (builders of inexpensive 'cruisers'), and Gunboat (builder of high-end performance cruising multihulls). Bene is possibly only staying afloat through subsidies.

I wouldn't say any is my ideal 'cruising boat'...I wouldn't say I even have an ideal cruising boat. What I would pick for a blue-water cruiser isn't at all what I would pick for a coastal cruiser. And neither might be a nice weekender.

I have done quite a few miles on a large variety of boats...racing, cruising, and deliveries. I see what people are buying, and what they're chartering. The big trends I've seen are towards easier sail and anchor handling, more room, more luxury features and the systems to power them, and of course there's always cost pressures. Performance features like canting keels, water ballast, and foils are at odds with what the general market place wants in cruising boats. The people who are pushing them aren't currently cruising in a performance boat and are seeking even greater performance. In fact, I doubt they have any financial means at all. Until DL writes an actual check, the industry will ignore him. The builders are going to build what people with checkbooks in hand want to buy. . At the moment, and for the foreseeable future, that's going to be floating condos whether we like it or not.

 

Why on earth do you keep linking what boats get sold into the charter trade and cruising... or DL and builders with an interest in lifting foils and foiling such as Gunboat, HH, Outremer, DNA, or boats like Extreme H2O, Fujin, F4/G4, etc...???

 

The one ain't the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

One of the realities of being a cruiser is that even for ocean crossing cruisers, the amount of time underway AND sailing (as opposed to underway and motoring) is a relatively small percentage of the time that cruisers spend using their boats. Making significant sacrifices of money, accommodations, complexity, weight management, etc, etc for a small subset of their boating time simply isn't worth the gains. By definition, cruising is about much more than speed or even solely sailing.

 

Kind of my point earlier, but more succinctly put.

 

It's not worth giving up on my fuel range, food storage, tools, spares, etc. to eliminate a few days of sailing a year.

 

Different stokes.

 

IIRC, you're in New Cal? I've had wonderful times sailing all around that place in my cruising boat. It has some of the best day sailing in the world IMHO. Having a boat that's a blast to sail in the places I get to has been a joy for me. Dropping a day off a passage isn't often a big deal. Nobody is giving out prizes. Engines are a great performance equalizer on many passages, too. For me, the fun is having the performance for the day sails and short passages. For just getting from place to place motoring makes much more sense and being inside out of the weather to do it is best. But then, why sail at all?

 

 

Currently we're in Sydney. Since arriving in New Zealand in 2014 our passages have been relatively short and only a few times a year. We do move around when we get there, but it's generally all day sails. Actually, in general our passages are fairly short and a few times a year. The only year with a LOT of passages was 2014, where we went from Panama to New Zealand between April and November. (to Galapagos 900, Marquesas, 3000, Tahiti,500, NZ 2000)

 

During that time I might add that we did a major provisioning in Panama in APRIL and filled the diesel. We took on a small amount of diesel (50 gallons or so) in the Galapagos, and shopped intermittently for fresh stuff and occasional small amounts of things everywhere, but hardly any meat which was generally poor quality and expensive. We sailed to French Polynesia, went through the Tuamotus. We finally ran out of stored provisions in JULY, but still didn't take on fuel until we'd made the 500 mile trip to Tahiti from Rangiroa. I'm reasonable certain we couldn't carry that much food and fuel in a boat that was designed to foil.

 

Travels since arriving in NZ:

 

May/June 2015, NZ - Fiji, ~1,000 nm (6+ days, though we slowed intentionally to wait for Customs)

Nov 2015, Fiji-NZ, ~1,000 (6ish)

June 2016, NZ - New Cal, ~900 (5ish)

Sept 2016, New Cal - Brisbane, ~900 (5ish)

Nov 2016, Brisbane - Sydney, < 500 (<3)

 

So twenty-five "passage" days since November 2014. The rest is local, coastal stuff in the places we've visited.

 

This isn't atypical. We moved around a lot in Fiji, and in New Caledonia. I can't see myself foiling through the reefs and whales in New Cal any more than I'd see myself zipping among the rather poorly charted reefs in Fiji. We moved slowly by design, and stopped to look at whales.

 

If you tripled my passage speed you'd cut my passage days from twenty-five to eight, saving me a massive eight days of offshore time a year. That's pretty tough to cost justify.

 

My boat is fun to sail, and is quite exhilarating in a fresh breeze. I've not the least interest in moving it at 20+ knots if it means I'm hanging on white knuckled for hours on end; right now there's only three of us. We've put up 200 mile days with minimal effort and usually make 180 or so with breeze. Why would I want to make it stressful? Why the heck would I want to sail "on the edge" for any length of time at all? I'm cruising, not racing. The engine is for when the wind dies or is light and contrary. We use it as little as possible. The boat is usually faster with breeze to sail and more comfortable.

 

The G4 is NOT and never was a boat for full time cruisers like me. Too expensive, too tweaky. It's a boat for people that visit their boat from time to time to sail it and go places but don't live aboard extensively. It would be an absolute blast as a coastal cruiser. From our old port in East Greenwich we could easily go to Nantucket or the Vineyard for a weekend. Good fun.

 

If you want to define "Cruising" as coastal weekending and vacations, there may be a near future market for that if it can be priced for more people. But it is hard to picture any sort of appeal to make the sacrifices in comfort and safety worth if for folks like me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think he is just being deliberately obtuse. Just look at the recent troubles/failure of Pacific Seacraft and Island Packet and the long standing success and expansion of Outremer. His dinosaurs are starting to feel some heat, LOL.

Not just IP, but Hunter (builders of inexpensive 'cruisers'), and Gunboat (builder of high-end performance cruising multihulls). Bene is possibly only staying afloat through subsidies.

I wouldn't say any is my ideal 'cruising boat'...I wouldn't say I even have an ideal cruising boat. What I would pick for a blue-water cruiser isn't at all what I would pick for a coastal cruiser. And neither might be a nice weekender.

I have done quite a few miles on a large variety of boats...racing, cruising, and deliveries. I see what people are buying, and what they're chartering. The big trends I've seen are towards easier sail and anchor handling, more room, more luxury features and the systems to power them, and of course there's always cost pressures. Performance features like canting keels, water ballast, and foils are at odds with what the general market place wants in cruising boats. The people who are pushing them aren't currently cruising in a performance boat and are seeking even greater performance. In fact, I doubt they have any financial means at all. Until DL writes an actual check, the industry will ignore him. The builders are going to build what people with checkbooks in hand want to buy. . At the moment, and for the foreseeable future, that's going to be floating condos whether we like it or not.

Why on earth do you keep linking what boats get sold into the charter trade and cruising... or DL and builders with an interest in lifting foils and foiling such as Gunboat, HH, Outremer, DNA, or boats like Extreme H2O, Fujin, F4/G4, etc...???

 

The one ain't the other.

The charter market and mega-yacht market are the segments of the marine industry churning over significant $. Bene snd Lagoon supply a large % of the charter market. IP and Hunter didn't, and there simply weren't enough sales to private owners to keep them in business. There's nothing stopping people from a custom built foiling or whatever cruising boat. Doesn't seem to be any activity on that front whatsoever. And you can bet that if there was a large demand for such boats, builders would be falling all over themselves to meet it. Market demand isn't determined by a handful of 'experts' behind keyboards, it's determined by people banging on the doors with money in their hands. So where are they? Only one G4 was built, and that was on spec. IDK how many F4 and Outremers built. Is it as many as Lagoons?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would guess many more Lagoons than performance cats built. Agree everything you say but what has that got to do with the price of tea in China as the saying goes... since the topic is cruising (not chartering)?? And you consistently restrict "cruising" to blue water or offshore cruising. Cruising as you define it is a small segment in the overall boat market (and charter much much larger for sure). But we ain't talking about foiling charter boats. Agree that's all about wedding cake marans. We are talking about would you cruise a foiler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...it is hard to picture any sort of appeal to make the sacrifices in comfort and safety worth if for folks like me.

It is wonderful that you are having a good time cruising in your way. And, I suspect it's a way that a great many would enjoy. That's all good and I wish you well.

 

Perhaps I'm misreading you but it seems that you believe that everybody who is "cruising" is doing it in your style. For some reason that irks me. Partly because it involves a circular definition of cruising and partly because there are people who have chosen to do it differently. Me, for example. And, I'm hardly alone.

 

It's cool that you don't want to sail 20 knots in your home afloat in the reefs and whales of the islands. But, I have sailed my boat near or above 20 knots in and around New Cal, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga and many more. And I've sailed in some of those places in company with faster boats that also sailed there on their own bottoms. I've sailed a fair number of miles in a boat that doesn't carry even the 50 gallons that is apparently just a top off for your tanks. So, while I think your path is a good one and probably a wise one isn't the only one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...it is hard to picture any sort of appeal to make the sacrifices in comfort and safety worth if for folks like me.

It is wonderful that you are having a good time cruising in your way. And, I suspect it's a way that a great many would enjoy. That's all good and I wish you well.

 

Perhaps I'm misreading you but it seems that you believe that everybody who is "cruising" is doing it in your style. For some reason that irks me. Partly because it involves a circular definition of cruising and partly because there are people who have chosen to do it differently. Me, for example. And, I'm hardly alone.

 

It's cool that you don't want to sail 20 knots in your home afloat in the reefs and whales of the islands. But, I have sailed my boat near or above 20 knots in and around New Cal, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga and many more. And I've sailed in some of those places in company with faster boats that also sailed there on their own bottoms. I've sailed a fair number of miles in a boat that doesn't carry even the 50 gallons that is apparently just a top off for your tanks. So, while I think your path is a good one and probably a wise one isn't the only one.

In my teens, I camp-cruised a 470 a few times. However, I never claimed there was a widespread demand, or that it represented the 'future' of cruising. If there's a handful of people cruising at 20 knots in minimalist boats, good for them. But as long as they're representing just the tiniest fraction of cruising sailors, there's no justification in proclaiming it the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

...it is hard to picture any sort of appeal to make the sacrifices in comfort and safety worth if for folks like me.

It is wonderful that you are having a good time cruising in your way. And, I suspect it's a way that a great many would enjoy. That's all good and I wish you well.

 

Perhaps I'm misreading you but it seems that you believe that everybody who is "cruising" is doing it in your style. For some reason that irks me. Partly because it involves a circular definition of cruising and partly because there are people who have chosen to do it differently. Me, for example. And, I'm hardly alone.

 

It's cool that you don't want to sail 20 knots in your home afloat in the reefs and whales of the islands. But, I have sailed my boat near or above 20 knots in and around New Cal, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga and many more. And I've sailed in some of those places in company with faster boats that also sailed there on their own bottoms. I've sailed a fair number of miles in a boat that doesn't carry even the 50 gallons that is apparently just a top off for your tanks. So, while I think your path is a good one and probably a wise one isn't the only one.

 

In my teens, I camp-cruised a 470 a few times. However, I never claimed there was a widespread demand, or that it represented the 'future' of cruising. If there's a handful of people cruising at 20 knots in minimalist boats, good for them. But as long as they're representing just the tiniest fraction of cruising sailors, there's no justification in proclaiming it the future.

 

Aha, I think I see the problem. I didn't think the OP or anyone else was claiming foiling or "fast" sailing in any form was THE FUTURE of cruising. I certainly don't think there is likely to be "widespread demand" for voyaging foilers. Just that some folks might choose to do it. Of course, there isn't really wide spread demand for new voyaging boats at all. I had one built in the lightish / fastish corner of the envelope but in the greater scheme of things not a lot of new voyaging boats get built most years. I'd guess that in a given year the demand for new offshore voyaging yachts is closer to the demand for Bugatti Chirons than it is to the demand for Toyota Corollas. Most people buy and re-purpose used boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...it is hard to picture any sort of appeal to make the sacrifices in comfort and safety worth if for folks like me.

It is wonderful that you are having a good time cruising in your way. And, I suspect it's a way that a great many would enjoy. That's all good and I wish you well.

 

Perhaps I'm misreading you but it seems that you believe that everybody who is "cruising" is doing it in your style. For some reason that irks me. Partly because it involves a circular definition of cruising and partly because there are people who have chosen to do it differently. Me, for example. And, I'm hardly alone.

 

It's cool that you don't want to sail 20 knots in your home afloat in the reefs and whales of the islands. But, I have sailed my boat near or above 20 knots in and around New Cal, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga and many more. And I've sailed in some of those places in company with faster boats that also sailed there on their own bottoms. I've sailed a fair number of miles in a boat that doesn't carry even the 50 gallons that is apparently just a top off for your tanks. So, while I think your path is a good one and probably a wise one isn't the only one.

 

 

Try reading my ENTIRE post, eh?

 

Did I not say, and I quote:

 

The G4 is NOT and never was a boat for full time cruisers like me. Too expensive, too tweaky. It's a boat for people that visit their boat from time to time to sail it and go places but don't live aboard extensively. It would be an absolute blast as a coastal cruiser. From our old port in East Greenwich we could easily go to Nantucket or the Vineyard for a weekend. Good fun.

 

If you want to define "Cruising" as coastal weekending and vacations, there may be a near future market for that if it can be priced for more people. But it is hard to picture any sort of appeal to make the sacrifices in comfort and safety worth if for folks like me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...it is hard to picture any sort of appeal to make the sacrifices in comfort and safety worth if for folks like me.

It is wonderful that you are having a good time cruising in your way. And, I suspect it's a way that a great many would enjoy. That's all good and I wish you well.

 

Perhaps I'm misreading you but it seems that you believe that everybody who is "cruising" is doing it in your style. For some reason that irks me. Partly because it involves a circular definition of cruising and partly because there are people who have chosen to do it differently. Me, for example. And, I'm hardly alone.

 

It's cool that you don't want to sail 20 knots in your home afloat in the reefs and whales of the islands. But, I have sailed my boat near or above 20 knots in and around New Cal, Vanuatu, Fiji, Tonga and many more. And I've sailed in some of those places in company with faster boats that also sailed there on their own bottoms. I've sailed a fair number of miles in a boat that doesn't carry even the 50 gallons that is apparently just a top off for your tanks. So, while I think your path is a good one and probably a wise one isn't the only one.

 

 

And you are mis-reading me. I have said repeatedly that my position applies primarily to the "long distance liveaboard bluewater" definition of cruising. There is rarely any content in "Cruising Anarchy" that applies to demographic. I've repeatedly stated in this thread and others that there are many types of "cruising". Bob is completely right that the answer to the question in the OP is meaningless until you define the type of "cruising" you are talking about.

 

I'm interested to hear more about the boat you were zipping around New Cal in, whether or not you live on it, etc. There were certainly some fast boats there. Most of them did not appear to be lived on as a permanent home, but of course I could be wrong. Jessica Rabbit is sexy as hell, but I wouldn't want to live on her. They may be out there living on boats like that, but I'm not meeting them too often in the circles I've been running in.

 

I get that there are differences in styles of "cruising". I cruised all over southern New England before I moved on board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know what I think, buy and sail what you want.

 

 

 

Ohhh! Thank God, Finally!

 

(I just knew we'd get there eventually)

 

btw, in that Other thread ---- Race if you want to, don't if you don't want to!

 

Glad it's all worked out. Hey Scot, no more need for the forums now, we got it under control......!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as the discussion in this thread has gone nowhere fast, maybe we have been looking at this from the wrong side. Those who are currently cruising with washing machines, microwaves, SUP's and RIB dinghies will not be convinced their boats with everything aboard will ever be able to foil - probably rightly so!

 

So let's change tack: instead if seeing if current cruising boats could foil, how about looking at foiling boats that might be able to cruise?

 

To date, there has only been one serious attempt at a foiling 'cruising' boat, ie built for more than daysailing around the buoys - and that is the DNA Performance G4 (née Gunboat)

 

http://dnaperformancesailing.com/our-boats/g4/

 

Built with (some) accomodation, berths and a galley of sorts, it would appear to have the basics to be able to cruise. OK, it had a widely publicised capsize - but then any boat can be pushed over its limits, no?

 

So, how far could you cruise on a g4? Maybe up to a couple of weeks in the Med sounds feasable, but with the lack of basic shelter in the galley, I would guess northern latitudes are not a good idea. I would suggest some cover rigged over the galley island would be essential in any case.

 

Some basic numbers to consider: difference between lightship condition of 2835kg and max load at 4300kg is just 1465kg, just under a ton and a half

 

Second, water tankage is listed at just 40litres (say 10 gals)

 

post-39772-0-85988900-1483977035_thumb.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recall any mention of G4 being intended for cruising. Weekender perhaps.

 

 

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/toby-hodges-blog/gunboat-g4-the-first-flying-cruising-yacht-60719

 

 

 

“It’s the baddest-ass coastal cruiser ever,” said Gunboat’s mercurial founder Peter Johnstone when I bumped into him at METS in Amsterdam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, no not again. Must be a slow day.

 

Sorry Kochosaur. Some prefer the G4 to the C36 on Kent's cruise... or any of the G66s or B53 w/ C foils to your tired, slow old IOR warhorses for your offshore RTW cruise.

 

I refer you all to the Joli epiphany (slightly edited below) which to be fair to the man and his wisdom really should be the final word.

 

You know what I think, buy and sail and cruise what you want

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't recall any mention of G4 being intended for cruising. Weekender perhaps.

 

http://www.yachtingworld.com/blogs/toby-hodges-blog/gunboat-g4-the-first-flying-cruising-yacht-60719

 

Its the baddest-ass coastal cruiser ever, said Gunboats mercurial founder Peter Johnstone when I bumped into him at METS in Amsterdam.

 

Well, that didn't work out so well then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh, no not again. Must be a slow day.

 

Sorry Kochosaur. Some prefer the G4 to the C36 on Kent's cruise... or any of the G66s or B53 w/ C foils to your tired, slow old IOR warhorses for your offshore RTW cruise.

 

I refer you all to the Joli epiphany (slightly edited below) which to be fair to the man and his wisdom really should be the final word.

 

You know what I think, buy and sail and cruise what you want

No one is stopping you from buying a G4. Go cruising. Hire pros to sail the boat for your family. Cross fingers they don't capsize it. Probably not most people's expectations of relaxation on the water, but knock yourself out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh, no not again. Must be a slow day.

 

Sorry Kochosaur. Some prefer the G4 to the C36 on Kent's cruise... or any of the G66s or B53 w/ C foils to your tired, slow old IOR warhorses for your offshore RTW cruise.

 

I refer you all to the Joli epiphany (slightly edited below) which to be fair to the man and his wisdom really should be the final word.

 

You know what I think, buy and sail and cruise what you want

No one is stopping you from buying a G4. Go cruising. Hire pros to sail the boat for your family. Cross fingers they don't capsize it. Probably not most people's expectations of relaxation on the water, but knock yourself out.

 

You applying for the job, LOL?

 

Be fun to meet and have a beer sometime and compare notes. Your a IOR racer right? Betting there is a good chance my kids my kids have cruised more miles to more places than you might have been - never mind the wife and I, pre-kids. Never ever paid a pro to sail and don't plan to. You will likely disagree but I don't see that as an issue for the G/F4 for coastal stuff but I do agree with you for the G66 or B53. But not because of lifting foils... just too damn much boat and complicated systems for Mom and Pop IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh, no not again. Must be a slow day.

 

Sorry Kochosaur. Some prefer the G4 to the C36 on Kent's cruise... or any of the G66s or B53 w/ C foils to your tired, slow old IOR warhorses for your offshore RTW cruise.

 

I refer you all to the Joli epiphany (slightly edited below) which to be fair to the man and his wisdom really should be the final word.

 

You know what I think, buy and sail and cruise what you want

No one is stopping you from buying a G4. Go cruising. Hire pros to sail the boat for your family. Cross fingers they don't capsize it. Probably not most people's expectations of relaxation on the water, but knock yourself out.

You applying for the job, LOL?

 

Be fun to meet and have a beer sometime and compare notes. Your a IOR racer right? Betting there is a good chance my kids my kids have cruised more miles to more places than you might have been - never mind the wife and I, pre-kids. Never ever paid a pro to sail and don't plan to. You will likely disagree but I don't see that as an issue for the G/F4 for coastal stuff but I do agree with you for the G66 or B53. But not because of lifting foils... just too damn much boat and complicated systems for Mom and Pop IMHO.

I raced CCA, IOR, MORC, IMS, and PHRF. Plus a lot of dinghies, and a few multis. Plenty of miles cruising and deliveries, inc some to my uncles charter business which grew pretty big. 45 years in the marine industry as boatbuilder, sailmaker, BN, delivery captain or crew, rigger, mechanic. I didn't do electronics or refrigeration is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Oh, no not again. Must be a slow day.

 

Sorry Kochosaur. Some prefer the G4 to the C36 on Kent's cruise... or any of the G66s or B53 w/ C foils to your tired, slow old IOR warhorses for your offshore RTW cruise.

 

I refer you all to the Joli epiphany (slightly edited below) which to be fair to the man and his wisdom really should be the final word.

 

You know what I think, buy and sail and cruise what you want

No one is stopping you from buying a G4. Go cruising. Hire pros to sail the boat for your family. Cross fingers they don't capsize it. Probably not most people's expectations of relaxation on the water, but knock yourself out.

 

You applying for the job, LOL?

 

Be fun to meet and have a beer sometime and compare notes. Your a IOR racer right? Betting there is a good chance my kids my kids have cruised more miles to more places than you might have been - never mind the wife and I, pre-kids. Never ever paid a pro to sail and don't plan to. You will likely disagree but I don't see that as an issue for the G/F4 for coastal stuff but I do agree with you for the G66 or B53. But not because of lifting foils... just too damn much boat and complicated systems for Mom and Pop IMHO.

uncles charter business

 

 

Which if you don't mind my asking? We worked w some back in the day as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL, oh, that little outfit. With that kind of family money you should be buying the F4.

 

We were working w La Vida I think or something like that. Doubt they are still around. Big on Pearson 424s if I recall... Foil that!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites