• 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.  
ricwoz

New vs. Old school blue water 37 footers?

Recommended Posts

For a couple doing long range cruising in the Pacific it used to be that a good affordable boat would be something like a Pacific Seacraft 37.     I sailed to Bermuda on a Hans Christian 36 many years ago, and we hit absolutely horrible weather and the boat never gave me a worry, and sort of convinced me that there was something to the old-school, double ender for passage making over the typical boats I grew up sailing on in the Great Lakes, like Sabres and Ericsons.    I got busy having a family and a career, and most of my sailing was on beach cats for a decade, followed by no sailing at all for too long. 

Now I'm thinking about getting a boat to sail from Washington to Hawaii and beyond, and I don't want to be stuck with my 1980s vision of "bluewater".    But I've missed a lot. 

I see boats like the Xc range, which are priced similarly to Pacific Seacraft, Tayana, and Hans Christians, but obviously are designed with very different ideas.   How do these general types of boat stack up?  Is there any reason to still favor the older double-ender style over the newer ones?   

The gods willing I'll be in a position to buy a nice boat in a year or two and plan to sail to the Philippines, where I will be retiring with my wife, and wondered what people here with more experience think about the relative merits of the two types.   I've thought 37 foot or so was a good size for a couple, maybe I could go a little smaller in a more modern boat which seem to have more volume below per foot of LOA,  but also maybe I could go larger as the prices on some of the newer designs seems a bit less. 

Apologies in advance if this has been covered previously, I did try to do some searches, but couldn't find a topic much like this.  Thanks in advance for your sharing your opinions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it depends a lot on how you see your personal cruising style.  What are your priorities?  More modern hulls of the same length will be lighter, hence less volume for tanks, provisions, personal stuff, tools and spares, etc.  But the lighter boat can be faster, get you to port sooner, run from bad weather.  The older/heavier boat may be slower but you can take more with you, maybe feel more secure/safer.  For me safety and comfort don't come as much from the boat as they do from preparation, timing, self awareness/limits and reliability/simplicity.  Different boats draw different cliques- are you a pirate or a techie?  Don't think there's a better boat that lets any majority check a box.  But there's the perfect boat for you.  For me, I've picked a weight, not a length- then the class can include 30' snails and 45' ULDBs.  That's a wide range- brings it back to "who are you?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Piggy-backing on "boatcat65's" comments: If there was a "best" boat type, and everyone wanted the "best", we'd all be sailing the same boat.:)

When it comes to picking a boat for any desired adventure, we seem to spend so much time focusing on the boat - when in reality it is our attitude and desire that will be the biggest factor in the outcome. The best boat for you will be the one that comes closest to matching the attitude you are comfortable with in operating it. There is no shame in being stuck in your 1980's vision of "bluewater". Designs and attitudes have changed a lot - but the sea has not. If cared for, old boats can do what they were designed to to do just as well today as they ever could - it is our attitudes that change. For example, in another thread I suggested a Block Island 40 as a possible choice to meet the needs of a family for weekend cruising. In the 1960's & 70's, countless families used that boat - and similar boats - to do exactly that, and they were happy. But today, the boat has been deemed "tiny" - only "suitable for two, and a couple of visitors". The older boat really hasn't changed that much in its modern iteration, but the attitudes and perspectives of people certainly have.  

If your intended use is to sail to across and down the Pacific to the Philippines as a couple in the 21st century, length still equals speed - and size equals load carrying capacity. (...load not being just people, but water, fuel, dinghies, food, supplies, and comfort items.)  You can ignore a lot of things, but the basic physics of sailing still apply to modern cruising boats - and waterline length is a big factor in speed for your heavy non-planing cruiser.  Light modern boats may be faster in spurts, but the key is how consistently can you maintain that speed?  Will it carry the load? And regardless, a good cruising boat of any vintage should be able to take care of itself fairly well when you are necessarily pre-occupied elsewhere. Can it comfortably and readily lie-ahull for a few days? Can it self-steer long enough for you to go below for a while without the auto-pilot working? Will it carry all you want without the performance suffering terribly?  What is the longest you could expect to be on passage? 60 days? 90 days? What if the water-maker fails? 

In the end, I imagine you will be best suited to a boat in the 20,000+ lb. range of displacement no matter what length it ends up being. Whatever you choose, the boat should reflect your sensibilities and your attitude, not what all the cool people are doing or using. (..can you tell that I sail an old and uncool boat?:D)  I bet you will know what you want when you see it - good luck in the search! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one wants to sail a slow crappy handling boat, but just for example if you had any number of fast light boats, you might really love the exciting sailing and curse the lack of storage, lack of tankage, shallow bilges that get water everywhere, and all the other things that differentiate a race winner from a home.

YMMV and all, but I can't say the PS 37 is a bad boat in 2017 and neither is a Valiant 40 and both are a step up in performance from a traditional full keel boat.

Right now for me to sail to Bermuda, I would take 3 weeks off work and a 5 day passage vs a slow boat taking 7 days really gives me a lot more vacation time on the island. If I were retired, I might not really care that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've been giving this question a lot of thought for 50 years. I designed heavy cruising bats and I have designed light cruising boats.

Two categories does not cover or even come close to the variety of design choices.

I'm not sure the "old school" vs "new school" approach works. I'd be more inclined to break it down into high D/L boats vs low D/L boats. And of course with that goes high and low SA/D numbers. But in the end I think it's about personal sailing style and how long you want to stay self sufficient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob - what are your thoughts on shallow bilges?

My old C&C 35 is fast in any wind offshore, but water gets EVERYWHERE because the bilge holds about 5 gallons when upright and none healed over and it gets to be a really annoying quality of life issue with anything in the lower lockers getting wet sooner or later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kent:

If you asked me to design you a fast cruising boat I would recommend some deadrise in order to get some depth to the bilge and a natural bilge sump. I think no deadrise is faster but not faster enough to offset the annoyance of not having a sump.

Starb%20lines_zpsqldkygu1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Choosing a live aboard is a balance between a size large enough to carry the equipment and provisions you need, and small enough for a couple to handle without fatigue on a passage. 35-40' is about right. Find a boat in that range you like.  Doesn't need to handle Cape Horn or Hurricanes...prudent planning avoids extreme weather. Most time will be at dock or anchored out. Most of the sailing will be off the wind, but reasonable windward ability is desirable. Draft should be compatible with area you're cruising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Lin and Larry Pardey have a lot to answer for - at least to American and Canadian cruisers. They convinced a generation or two that slow and steady is the way to go.

The French all cruise around the world in light fin keelers with their wives, mistresses, girlfriends, kids (usually all on the same boat). Or some that have read Moitessier have ugly steel hard chine and steal your stuff. The Aussies sail odd boats if they are older because there were high import taxes a while ago and so they built a lot in-country. The other European countries tend to the medium range of displacement. Brits tend to follow US/Canadian style boats.

Our first boat was a slow heavy, high D/L 30' mono. A good safe first boat for offshore cruising.

Second real boat was a 40' light displacement cat. There is nothing better than a good sailing boat (be it cat or mono). If you like sailing, get a boat that sails well. All boats slow down when heavily loaded for cruising, but a heavy slow boat will always be slower.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A keel stub helps give a shallow hull some sump, also gets the lead outside and helps the keel stay attached to the boat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, olaf hart said:

A keel stub helps give a shallow hull some sump, also gets the lead outside and helps the keel stay attached to the boat.

That's what they did with the C&C 35 Mk 3, there still isn't a lot of capacity in the sump but a decent pump takes care of that. We haven't got water into any really unusual places during normal heeling over, but it will ooze out the corners if you're playing silly buggers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he'd done it well he would have come back looking like George Vancouver.

I give him a C+

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Brent Swain said:

Adding the needed thousands of pounds of gear to a 10,000 lb boat is a much bigger percentage of increase in displacement than adding the same weight to a 20,000 lb boat. The heavier design will be floating much closer to its designed displacement.

Even when it's been explained to you you can't understand the concept of Pounds Per Inch Immersion and Waterplane Area can you?

As with everything you just go with gut feel and call it technical awareness or engineering.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jon: I find a lot of newbies have the same problem BS has with weights and flotation. They assume a heavier boat will not sink the same rate as a lighter boat. I'm pretty good at explaining it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's a mistake to too easily associate heavy with slow or with a design that doesn't sail well, and no one knows this better or has more experience with this than Bob.

Look at his designs. I have every confidence that the carbon cutter design, for example, will be a joy to sail and at the same time inspire supreme confidence when pressed in heavy weather.

Also, to me a ULDB is light with flat sections aft so that it will get up on a plane when pressed enough. Planing regularly is not a reasonable expectation when mom and pop are voyaging with their household accoutrements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sa/D seems to be the biggy for making a heavy boat fast.

I knew a guy once who built a '65 Chevy Impala that would do the 1/4 mile in the 10's. That barge was big enough to have a big H in a circle on the hood and/or the trunk lid but he shoved about 900 horsepower into it and it would run that sort of crazy speed and acceleration.

Same process applies to boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Sa/D seems to be the biggy for making a heavy boat fast.

I knew a guy once who built a '65 Chevy Impala that would do the 1/4 mile in the 10's. That barge was big enough to have a big H in a circle on the hood and/or the trunk lid but he shoved about 900 horsepower into it and it would run that sort of crazy speed and acceleration.

Same process applies to boats.

I think there are important differences. For cruising acceleration is not an important consideration. 

What is important is that a heavy displacement design has its speed limited by hull speed. Sail area needs to be sufficient to get the boat to hull speed in the wind conditions available, but any more area is wasted.

For speed, planing or foiling is the way to get it, but these designs are impractical for a small crew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at Ted Hoods designs. For the most part they are on the heavy side of medium, have moderate SA/D's and are known for good light air performance. I think kdh summed it up well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, kdh said:

I think there are important differences. For cruising acceleration is not an important consideration. 

What is important is that a heavy displacement design has its speed limited by hull speed. Sail area needs to be sufficient to get the boat to hull speed in the wind conditions available, but any more area is wasted.

For speed, planing or foiling is the way to get it, but these designs are impractical for a small crew.

I don't think that a planing design is impractical, it just gives you the opportunity to go faster when you want to. Also it can be handy when going downwind in heavy weather as planing boats are easier to control in such conditions.

One thing that the pro heavy displacement people often forget to mention is that heavy means big sail area and heavy loads in sheets and halyards. For me this reason alone is enough to justify a lightish boat that isn't too powerful (read not extremely wide). Also on a heavy boat to mitigate the heavy loads, you often end relying on electric winches which is one extra level of complexity that might make you dependant on the generator. Finally, if the boat is already heavy, you loose payload capacity.

If you talk to people who have actually cruised extensively, often they will tell you to keep things as light and simple as practical and that if you can afford it and don't want to give away too much comfort, the big catamaran (40ft or more) is the best option (fast and comfortable), then the next best option is a lightish monhull with a long waterline, then a production boat that you tweak for offshore passages and finally a small bullet proof, very watertight and well prepared boat.  They will also tell you that If for some reason, you need a shallow draft, you need a heavier boat or a cat as you can't beat physics...

Being Fench, I tend to talk to French people ;-)  and people from other parts of the world will disagree...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with KDH. Racing really biased me poorly for the cruising we are doing now. If you've got enough wind for hull speed in a non-planer, carrying extra sail area is wasted. And lolling around at 4 knots boat speed in light winds when you could be doing 4.6 with a spinnaker up, is just fine given the realities of cruising. Particularly in coastal tropical Mexico where we are now. I had a new cruising chute with a sock made before leaving San Diego. Bagged the thing is twice the size of 3/4 oz symmetric in a turtle bag. Total waste of money and storage space. It lives at home in the basement now. Even with rockstar crew aboard for the SD-Cabo leg we had it up all of about 3-4 hours in a 1,000 miles. Just not worth the hassle. Particularly when my Esprit 37 runs so sweet under main and poled out 140.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

I don't think that a planing design is impractical, it just gives you the opportunity to go faster when you want to. Also it can be handy when going downwind in heavy weather as planing boats are easier to control in such conditions.

Displacement boats are difficult to control downwind only if they are pushed beyond hull speed.

27 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

One thing that the pro heavy displacement people often forget to mention is that heavy means big sail area and heavy loads in sheets and halyards. For me this reason alone is enough to justify a lightish boat that isn't too powerful (read not extremely wide). Also on a heavy boat to mitigate the heavy loads, you often end relying on electric winches which is one extra level of complexity that might make you dependant on the generator. Finally, if the boat is already heavy, you loose payload capacity.

At displacement speeds the usual heavy designs are more easily driven than planing boats, so the opposite is true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@kdh, in real life breaking seas, you don't always control well your speed.

And there is planing and planing, hulls shaped like the one below planes and are very easy to drive. There are also hard to drive heavy displacement boats, you can't generalise like this. 

2959.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly how does one "lose payload capacity"? This is a myth. I'd have to see a very coherent explanation of that idea. 

In terms of loading any boat for long term cruising it's volume that's the problem. Take two pickup trucks. Load each one with the identical load of "essential" cruising gear and stores. Drive to the marina where you will find a light 40'er and a heavy 40'er ties up alongside each other. Remember, the heavy boat has far more volume than the light boat. For an example consider a modern light cruiser might weigh 10,000 lbs. That means it has 156 cu ft of  immersed volume . Now take a 40'er displacing 26,000 lbs. That gives us 406 cu. ft. of immersed volume. The heavy boat has 2.6 times the immersed volume as the 10,000 lb. boat. And this is just immersed volume. I'd assume the heavy boat has higher freeboard and more cabin trunk so in the end the heavy boat probably has at least three times the available stowage volume.

Now start loading the boats, in a realistic and sea safe manner. When all the gear and stores are aboard the 26,000 lb. boat there will still be a big pile of gear and stores sitting there on the dock that just cannot be fit into the 10,000 lb. boat. It does not have the necessary volume.

 

Chute;

Good point. If 4 knots is "slow" is 4.5 knots "fast"? Hardly.

How about a photo of your lovely boat?

 

I have done some lightweight cruising boats capable of sustaining super hull speed, STARBUCK for instance. But I have also found that long term cruisers do not want to work that hard and seldom take advantage of that potential. They prefer to sail along at hull speed and relax. It's one thing to be theoretical and another to be practical, i.e. realistic. The advantage of the light boat for cruising is you can sustain hull, speed with smaller sails.

STARBUCK: D/L 100.00

Starbuck%20motors_zps7grdsgem.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cruising is all about sea state and comfort, not boat speed.

The only time I want speed is beating a front to a safe anchorage, that's what motorsailing is for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What about speed for weather routing or outrunning a storm? 

Also, the ULDB will have lighter loads, and as Bob mentions, you can sustain a decent speed with smaller sail area. I think this also plays into keeping decent speed under reef, or even being able to be content with not losing to much speed, but gaining comfort and losing less nominal speed by reefing early.  An undercanvassed heavier boat might turn sluggish earlier as you go up the wind range(if you reef to early). A stiff heavy boat might enjoy 25 knots, but then your left reefing in 25 or better while you could reef earlier with less speed penalty in a lighter boat.

Starbuck is a gem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All else being equal (and it never is) the heavier boat will be the stiffer boat. RM is RA times displ. Our two example 40'ers probably have about the same beam and RA but the heavier boat will have a greater RM due to its greater displ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Chute: You are making me home sick. I can even smell it. I had a pilot berth to port and that was a great place to stow my guitar

You anchored photo went straight into my archives. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anchored at Isla Danzante, BCS Mexe

 

Here's my take on the original poster's question about old school new school bigger better kinda stuff:

This my E37 fully outfitted for cruising with amenities like 16Kbtu reverse HVAC, watermakers, full N2K networked electronics suite, 10ft air floor Avon, 2 Torqeedo outboards, 2 ISUPs, combo gimbaled all-electric microwave/convectionoven/grill/twin burners, refer and freezer, dual 150A alternators into high CAR batteries so no need for solar/wind/propane/gasoline, 2 dreadnought Martins, 88 key piano, 3 tuna sticks, a 6 foot Rife speargun, snorkeling gear and wet suits. Daily long hot showers are encouraged for all my crew in a real dedicated shower stall  that a couple can use simultaneously (thanks Bob!).

This "old design" boat swallowed all that kit and lI think it ooks as clean and zen like below as it does on deck. You can do that in a 2-3 person boat. In this configuration it's a great day sailor as well as a cruiser.

Wife approved a $750K budget for a replacement boat 12 years ago, but with a nasty caveat - I'd have to sell the E37. Put my deposit down anyway on a new Beneteau 57. Mainsail jammed in the mast on sea trial. Backed out of the deal. But couldn't leave it at that. So I chartered a B57 and we banged uphill from St Martin to Antigua just to see. Cavernous volumes of empty air with no where to sleep at sea. Big crash on every 10th wave. Kept wondering how much more uncomfortable I would have been in the E37.

I am not against newer bigger boats, it's just that for our style of cruising it hasn't made sense. I see the only rationale as faster passage making, but that's absurdly infrequent over a long time of boat ownership.

A bigger crew requires a bigger boat.

A bigger boat requires a bigger crew.

Circular logic to me.

Unless you just like to be around a lot of people at sea.

Bob disses his E37 design for its IOR-like high aspect small main, but I find that a bonus feature for shorthanded cruising. No need for lazy jacks, stack packs, or lumberjacks. I find having the sail area disproportionately large in the headsail much easier to manage than in the main.

As regards the Dashew school of big 65' cruisers that can be safely handled by just a couple, I am sure it can be done. I am pretty sure I could learn technical rock climbing too. I just don't want to do that.

I am still pursuing my childhood dream of traveling the world's oceans reasonably safe and comfortable. So totally open to new boat suggestions myself.

I just have this E37 problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Bob Perry modern light boats tend to be wider with more volume aft where stuff tend to be stored.Also the water plane area tend to be bigger, so less immersion for a given payload.  Sure if the designer didn't allow for storage, it won't work but on a serious cruising boat, this should be designed for like below: 

bateau-fora-marine-rm-1050-4363830.jpg

Nevertheless I am with you with the righting moment thing and you definitely don't want to store heavy stuff on the deck of a lightish boat. 

I also agree with you that people don't sail often their fast boats to racing speeds but when you get caught in a squall, it is much better to be on a boat that can accelerate under control, you just bear away to depower and then have time to think about the next action. 

I suppose that at the end it depends on your sailing style, in the French speaking world we tend to learn to sail proactively in heavy weather and our boats reflect this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, fufkin said:

What about speed for weather routing or outrunning a storm? 

Also, the ULDB will have lighter loads, and as Bob mentions, you can sustain a decent speed with smaller sail area. I think this also plays into keeping decent speed under reef, or even being able to be content with not losing to much speed, but gaining comfort and losing less nominal speed by reefing early.  An undercanvassed heavier boat might turn sluggish earlier as you go up the wind range(if you reef to early). A stiff heavy boat might enjoy 25 knots, but then your left reefing in 25 or better while you could reef earlier with less speed penalty in a lighter boat.

Starbuck is a gem.

If you are planning on outrunning weather across oceans you need sustained speeds over 8 knots, according to the Dashews.

this is their whole rationale for large, complex boats, with waterline lengths over 60'.

and in the end they gave up on sail and now build motor boats.

there is no way ordinary mom and dad cruisers are going to stay ahead of the weather in an open ocean, far better to have the boat and skills to deal with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the spirit of converting old racing boats, what about a sydney 38?  (or 36) plenty on the 2nd hand market Cat 1 or near Cat 1 ready.  Lots of 2nd hand sales, reasonable fit out below (bunks, showers etc...)  simple systems, reasonable turn of speed, a few had previously been set up for the charter market.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, olaf hart said:

If you are planning on outrunning weather across oceans you need sustained speeds over 8 knots, according to the Dashews.

this is their whole rationale for large, complex boats, with waterline lengths over 60'.

and in the end they gave up on sail and now build motor boats.

there is no way ordinary mom and dad cruisers are going to stay ahead of the weather in an open ocean, far better to have the boat and skills to deal with it.

You really need a vessel that can sustain 15 knots SOG and have accurate weather routing to properly avoid bad weather for an ocean passage.  Different for coastal cruising.

The problem with sailboats is that the wind doesn't always blow in the right direction or strength to make good speed before the weather system arrives.  And in many parts of the world ocean forecasting is more of a general indication that's often out by 100 miles and 20 knots. The Tasman is typical.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MikeJohns said:

You really need a vessel that can sustain 15 knots SOG and have accurate weather routing to properly avoid bad weather for an ocean passage.  Different for coastal cruising.

The problem with sailboats is that the wind doesn't always blow in the right direction or strength to make good speed before the weather system arrives.  And in many parts of the world ocean forecasting is more of a general indication that's often out by 100 miles and 20 knots. The Tasman is typical.

The Dashews reckon it's eight to ten knots, I won't ever know if they are right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, olaf hart said:

The Dashews reckon it's eight to ten knots, I won't ever know if they are right.

I have a recent naval study for smaller vessels .  Weather routing goes hand in hand with motion sickness index. The conclusion is that to keep the msi below a certain threshold by weather routing the vessel needs to sustain 15 knots and have accurate forecasts. The only alternative is a design with a more tolerable heave RAO. Female crew are also more susceptible ( bell curve of course). MSI is an average and it depends on personal tolerance threshold.

Interestingly yacht designers don't usually consider MSI or undertake RAO studies but it's essential data for many commercial designs. These days it's quite predictable, given a sea state, heading and a 3d model of the craft to predict just how tolerable the motion will be. Brewer had a go at this with his motion comfort index.

The idea of ocean cruising in a ULDB ....Ugh!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, MikeJohns said:

I have a recent naval study for smaller vessels .  Weather routing goes hand in hand with motion sickness index. The conclusion is that to keep the msi below a certain threshold by weather routing the vessel needs to sustain 15 knots and have accurate forecasts. The only alternative is a design with a more tolerable heave RAO. Female crew are also more susceptible ( bell curve of course). MSI is an average and it depends on personal tolerance threshold.

Interestingly yacht designers don't usually consider MSI or undertake RAO studies but it's essential data for many commercial designs. These days it's quite predictable, given a sea state, heading and a 3d model of the craft to predict just how tolerable the motion will be. Brewer had a go at this with his motion comfort index.

The idea of ocean cruising in a ULDB ....Ugh!

 

 

I don't think that the OP was asking asbout ULDB or anybody was saying that he should go the ULDB way, just discussing lighter boats.

Here are people crossing from Azores to Brittany on a 34ft plywood boat weighting 10 000lbs. Not ULDB but a nice "in the middle" boat that is very safe and easy to use. Note how at 1:50 they are going downwind under autopilot in 30 knots of wind with no drama.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's really interesting, we definitely plan our costal passages to minimise motion at sea.

15 knots sustained is never going to happen for us, we went through Banks Strait at 12 knots SOG, and the boat is said to have maintained  a sustained 19 knots in a west coaster in front of a southerly gale, but comfortable cruise for us is around 6.5k.

I was considering going up to 40hp when I re engine to make Bass Strait crossings a bit more predictable, but if my data is out by that order of magnitude it really doesn't matter, need to practice heaving to.

What variables are measured to determine an MSI?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A boat like STARBUCK, D/L 100 and small headsails and no flying sails can sustain  8 to 10 knots easily with more than 15 knots TWS. But a D/L 250 boat would probably need to fly bigger headsails and maybe flying sails to get the same average. My buddy who raced his Baba 40 AIRLOOM to Hawaii   said it was "hard work" to keep boat speed optimized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, fufkin said:

 

Also, the ULDB will have lighter loads,

"ULDB" is kind of an antiquated term now..,

nevertheless.., in general, higher performance boats - most of which are on the light side.., have _higher_ loads on both the standing and running rigging than heavier boats.

in most sailing situations, the loads are directly related to stiffness, or righting moment.

And while displacement by itself confers stability.., it matters enough where that weight is that it's most useful to to think of loads as deriving from stiffness.

most heavy cruising boats are fairly tender - especially when compared with modern race boats

in most sailing situations, the loads are limited by heeling - the boat heels over, and the loads don't increase anymore.

suer - there may be some sailing events where a heavy, tender, boat experiences high loading because of inertial effects.., but the loads still typically don't rise to the level experienced by modern light, high-stability, boats

it wasn't heavy cruising boats that drove the revolution in composite construction.., new rigs.., and high tech lines - it was (light) race boats - because they needed the strength to withstand the high loading

take a boat like the Ker 40 - 40ft, and about 4300kg, and very stiff - even without 1500lbs on the rail...it needs the highest tech rigging available, because the loads are high compared to a 40ft cruising boat -  that might displace 3X as much. 

ocean racing catamarans too - no lead at all, and quite light.., but incredibly stiff - the loads on these boats are astronomical!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...unfortunately for the majority of us the one determining parameter, overruling all others, to compare boats is their PRICE...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Panoramix said:
1 hour ago, A horse, of course said:

RAO?

+1

Response Amplitude Operator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tane said:

...unfortunately for the majority of us the one determining parameter, overruling all others, to compare boats is their PRICE...

One more reason to avoid weight, less sail area, less hardware...

Thanks for the acronym.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, us7070 said:

"ULDB" is kind of an antiquated term now..,

nevertheless.., in general, higher performance boats - most of which are on the light side.., have _higher_ loads on both the standing and running rigging than heavier boats.

in most sailing situations, the loads are directly related to stiffness, or righting moment.

And while displacement by itself confers stability.., it matters enough where that weight is that it's most useful to to think of loads as deriving from stiffness.

most heavy cruising boats are fairly tender - especially when compared with modern race boats

in most sailing situations, the loads are limited by heeling - the boat heels over, and the loads don't increase anymore.

suer - there may be some sailing events where a heavy, tender, boat experiences high loading because of inertial effects.., but the loads still typically don't rise to the level experienced by modern light, high-stability, boats

it wasn't heavy cruising boats that drove the revolution in composite construction.., new rigs.., and high tech lines - it was (light) race boats - because they needed the strength to withstand the high loading

take a boat like the Ker 40 - 40ft, and about 4300kg, and very stiff - even without 1500lbs on the rail...it needs the highest tech rigging available, because the loads are high compared to a 40ft cruising boat -  that might displace 3X as much. 

ocean racing catamarans too - no lead at all, and quite light.., but incredibly stiff - the loads on these boats are astronomical!

 

You are making apple to orange comparisons. A heavy boat will displace more water and thus you will need more power to make it go at a similar speed as the lighter one. Power come from righting moment hence heavier loads. Nevertheless open 40 style racing boats are very powerful for their weight with the associated big loads, but a light cruising boat doesn't have to be shaped like an open style boat, you don't need all this power to cruise and even if your hull is powerful, you don't have to use all the available power. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, ChuteFirst said:

Boat shots to show cushions & interriors 074 (1600x1200).jpg

hah, that piano brings up one of these nice yottie memories ...some 10 years ago, sigh, time flies, met a Canadian couple in Auckland marina on their one-off yacht, steel but surely no BS boat, the lady played piano and the design was adapted to that, in forecabin the bed was just a bit higher and an electric piano was sitting in a shelf under the mattress, she would pull out the piano shelf, the settee next to it would then be just perfect and that way the bedroom was converted into her practice and concerto room

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, us7070 said:

"ULDB" is kind of an antiquated term now..,

nevertheless.., in general, higher performance boats - most of which are on the light side.., have _higher_ loads on both the standing and running rigging than heavier boats.

in most sailing situations, the loads are directly related to stiffness, or righting moment.

And while displacement by itself confers stability.., it matters enough where that weight is that it's most useful to to think of loads as deriving from stiffness.

most heavy cruising boats are fairly tender - especially when compared with modern race boats

in most sailing situations, the loads are limited by heeling - the boat heels over, and the loads don't increase anymore.

suer - there may be some sailing events where a heavy, tender, boat experiences high loading because of inertial effects.., but the loads still typically don't rise to the level experienced by modern light, high-stability, boats

it wasn't heavy cruising boats that drove the revolution in composite construction.., new rigs.., and high tech lines - it was (light) race boats - because they needed the strength to withstand the high loading

take a boat like the Ker 40 - 40ft, and about 4300kg, and very stiff - even without 1500lbs on the rail...it needs the highest tech rigging available, because the loads are high compared to a 40ft cruising boat -  that might displace 3X as much. 

ocean racing catamarans too - no lead at all, and quite light.., but incredibly stiff - the loads on these boats are astronomical!

 

Loads as it relates to stiff sails or sheets over 15 feet of draft will not be constant on all points of sail. Intuitively load as it relates to righting moment is probably most accurate on a beam reach. When you factor in lift and a semi planing hull, especially going off the wind, the comparison gets cloudy.  Pushing a heavy displacement hull through the water on a broad reach at 8 knots will require more power(load/sail area) than a lighter semi planing hull, so you can achieve the same speed on a lighter boat with less loads. 

Also, there's nothing in the rule book that says cruising a lighter boat means you've gotta go with stiffer sheets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Panoramix said:

You are making apple to orange comparisons. A heavy boat will displace more water and thus you will need more power to make it go at a similar speed as the lighter one. Power come from righting moment hence heavier loads. Nevertheless open 40 style racing boats are very powerful for their weight with the associated big loads, but a light cruising boat doesn't have to be shaped like an open style boat, you don't need all this power to cruise and even if your hull is powerful, you don't have to use all the available power. 

i didn't say a light boat will have high loads..., i said that in general a high performance boat will have high loads.

if you made a light boat.., with relatively little righting moment.., the loads will be correspondingly low.

you said that "A heavy boat will displace more water and thus you will need more power to make it go at a similar speed as the lighter one" 

even if accept that you need more power to make it go make it go at a similar speed.., it doesn't neccessarily follow that you will get that power. in order to get the power.., you need righting moment. most heavy cruising boats are actually fairly tender, for their displacement. i said earlier that displacement alone confers some stability.., so i would normalize for that .

some of the heaviest sailing boats ever made got along fine with hemp rope...because they had very low stability.., and the loads on the rigging were low.

anyway - the only point i am trying to make is that it is incorrect to say, as many people do.., that light boats will have low rigging loads.., and heavy boats will have high rigging loads. the thing that the rigging load is most dependent on, is righting moment.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that we agree that sailing powered up implies big loads, I am just saying that from a practical point of view whether or not you have the power to go faster, you can sail the light boat at "cruising" speeds easily. 

Also, the hemp ropes were big ones, so not that weak. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Years ago when preparing for an 18 month cruise with the family (wife and 4 and 8 yr. old kids) I knew that most of the time I was essentially single handing and wanted a large boat but small sails to have to handle alone.

We ended up with a 44 foot Kantola designed trimaran which was a good fit for our purpose. Plenty of interior volume, very light weight (9000 pounds was light in 1988) and fast.  As far as planing while cruising, doing 14-15 knots in the dark with your family and belongings is a bit unnerving, I would generally throttle back if boat speed was greater than 10 knots at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is worthwhile thinking about what the speed differences really are.
A 30 foot LWL CCA boat will cross the Atlantic W-E in between 20-25 days weather depending.
A 60 foot Whitbread boat from 1994 will do that crossing in about 12-15 days.
A 70 foot VOR boat from now, will do that in what? 7 days?
Your cruising choices will be somewhere from that CCA boat, to about 30% faster, unless you go to a multihull, which will get you to 50% faster to so.

Then just as more important, you need a well-found well-equipped boat.

Nobody is sailing around weather in a 40 foot cruising sailboat.

7070 is correct about rig loads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, us7070 said:

anyway - the only point i am trying to make is that it is incorrect to say, as many people do.., that light boats will have low rigging loads.., and heavy boats will have high rigging loads. the thing that the rigging load is most dependent on, is righting moment.

 

I agree with 70707. Too many variable to make sweeping generalizations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, tane said:

...unfortunately for the majority of us the one determining parameter, overruling all others, to compare boats is their PRICE...

I had similar thoughts. For the vast majority of folks it is a question of what is the best cruising choice for the $xxx I have to spend. Within this budget you will have a variety of factors to consider, LOA is a relatively unimportant one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, olaf hart said:

That's really interesting, we definitely plan our costal passages to minimise motion at sea.

15 knots sustained is never going to happen for us, we went through Banks Strait at 12 knots SOG, and the boat is said to have maintained  a sustained 19 knots in a west coaster in front of a southerly gale, but comfortable cruise for us is around 6.5k.

I was considering going up to 40hp when I re engine to make Bass Strait crossings a bit more predictable, but if my data is out by that order of magnitude it really doesn't matter, need to practice heaving to.

What variables are measured to determine an MSI?

 

Each MSI is generated for a given location on the vessel for a particular Sea state ( full spectrum ) , heading and speed.

It requires a 3d computer model of the hull  Then mainly Displacement, CG and roll and pitch Gyradii. They are easy studies to conduct, but not cheap software packages.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bob Perry said:

I don't know of any yacht design office that does those studies. I certainly have not. So far things seem to be working. Sounds like fun though.

For 99% of the boats, wouldn't the most comfortable place to be almost always end up being pretty close to near amidships and fairly near the cabin sole? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2017 at 1:41 PM, fufkin said:

What about speed for weather routing or outrunning a storm? 

Also, the ULDB will have lighter loads, and as Bob mentions, you can sustain a decent speed with smaller sail area. I think this also plays into keeping decent speed under reef, or even being able to be content with not losing to much speed, but gaining comfort and losing less nominal speed by reefing early.  An undercanvassed heavier boat might turn sluggish earlier as you go up the wind range(if you reef to early). A stiff heavy boat might enjoy 25 knots, but then your left reefing in 25 or better while you could reef earlier with less speed penalty in a lighter boat.

Starbuck is a gem.

Jeff Johnstone and Ken Read are actively selling this philosophy.

They claim that the days of heavy, slow cruisers that can take a pounding are over, and that speed=safety. The ability to get out of a storm's way is more important than comfort. This was at a lecture they gave in Annapolis, near the end of winter that I attended.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-08-01 at 7:53 AM, olaf hart said:

Cruising is all about sea state and comfort, not boat speed.

The only time I want speed is beating a front to a safe anchorage, that's what motorsailing is for.

It's all subjective...I've cruised on a Santa Cruz 50 that the owner had optimized for fast cruising.  The boat has been sailed very far over the years.  As the owner of a small, slow boat, I f'ing loved it, and immediately wanted one  :-).  (But I can't afford something like that, and I don't really want one anyway b/c of the expense...unless I came into a big inheritance and wanted to blow it on my dream boat... :-) )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An Olson 40 or Santa Cruz 40 with a few changes for easier sail handling would be be my dream cruiser.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like displacement for a cruising boat and speed can be had with waterline at a reasonable price.  You can stuff a lot of stuff in the hole that displacement provides.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ajax said:

Jeff Johnstone and Ken Read are actively selling this philosophy.

They claim that the days of heavy, slow cruisers that can take a pounding are over, and that speed=safety. The ability to get out of a storm's way is more important than comfort. This was at a lecture they gave in Annapolis, near the end of winter that I attended.

Yes, getting out of a storm way is more accurate than "outrunning a storm". I don't think that many boats can outrun a storm (even the IMOCAs don't fo it during the vendée globe) but getting out of the way is more realistic. Even on a slow boat you do it when you are 50 miles from a sheltered place and you know that something bad is coming in 12 hours. Being able to cover 80 or 100miles in 12 hours give you more options if you use time cleverly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I rather like the idea of "getting out the path of a storm". But I have to say, in typical tradewinds sailing, you are at low enough latitudes that deep low pressure type gales are rather unlikely. But you need a FAST boat to really do this. Far better to have a good understanding of local weather patterns and sailing seasons to avoid being in an area where really bad weather is likely. 

As an aside, my wife has been doing research for climate change stories and how they will affect sailors. After speaking to metoerologists it's her understanding that (a) shoulder seasons / transition times for weather seasons are moving around a lot and thus sailing them becoming more dangerous (b) more heat in the atmosphere means more intense weather events. For instance East Coast sailors sailing to the Caribbean do it in November, to avoid hurricane season but before big time winter gales. That shoulder season may move around a bit (late season hurricanes AND earlier, stronger winter gales).

I can think of several instances where we sailed well off the rhumb line knowing a frontal passage was coming, and we would be at a better wind angle when it came, or a gradual wind shift as a system passed well to the south of us would veer the local wind so we sailed strategically different route knowing the wind would change.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Zonker said:

I rather like the idea of "getting out the path of a storm". But I have to say, in typical tradewinds sailing, you are at low enough latitudes that deep low pressure type gales are rather unlikely. But you need a FAST boat to really do this. Far better to have a good understanding of local weather patterns and sailing seasons to avoid being in an area where really bad weather is likely. 

As an aside, my wife has been doing research for climate change stories and how they will affect sailors. After speaking to metoerologists it's her understanding that (a) shoulder seasons / transition times for weather seasons are moving around a lot and thus sailing them becoming more dangerous (b) more heat in the atmosphere means more intense weather events. For instance East Coast sailors sailing to the Caribbean do it in November, to avoid hurricane season but before big time winter gales. That shoulder season may move around a bit (late season hurricanes AND earlier, stronger winter gales).

I can think of several instances where we sailed well off the rhumb line knowing a frontal passage was coming, and we would be at a better wind angle when it came, or a gradual wind shift as a system passed well to the south of us would veer the local wind so we sailed strategically different route knowing the wind would change.

 

I have the impression that fronts are occurring more frequently in the southern ocean, especially in winter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've sailed some pretty fast boats on long passages:  trade wind  transatlantic crossings, and deliveries from new england to the caribbean. the boats i am talking about here are all capable of speeds exceeding 20kts on the ocean - and have done so.

But.., on a long passage, you are never going  to average anywhere near the max speed of a fast boat, without a full racing crew.., even assuming the weather cooperates.., and we didn't. 

still., we could still average 9 to say 11kts over the length of the trip, even with one or two on a watch, no spinnakers at night.., and occasionally uncooperative weather.

this is still fast enough that it affects routing decisions compared with slower boats. windows that might not be acceptable for slower boats are acceptable for faster boats

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Zonker said:

I rather like the idea of "getting out the path of a storm".

The way one defines "storm" makes all the difference. A little bubble of low pressure can drop out of the tropics. Its dangerous sector is likely small and moving quickly. It probably won't hit you and if it does it'll move along right quick. With a decent forecast, avoiding the center shouldn't take much boat speed even if you are unlucky enough to be directly in its path. That same low might get caught on a big high and expand out into a half an ocean basin of gale force winds that could last a week or more. That kind of storm doesn't really have a path to get out of.

A common argument is that you can plan a passage between the tropics and the mid latitudes (say Opua <-> Suva) to avoid bad weather if you have a fast enough boat. That's sort of true (IME + WAG). Typically for small yachts there are one or two frontal passages on that trip. Fast boats have a better chance of seeing only one. However, motoring across the ridge is at least as effective as sailing quickly in terms of reducing risk and it's a lot cheaper and easier. Sometimes being able to stop is the best avoidance. Parking in the high while weather clears out farther down the route can pay big dividends in comfort and safety. Having a boat that's comfortable hove to is nice.  Sometimes it does pay to rush in ahead of deteriorating weather and sometimes routing is a little easier on a fast boat.  However, I wonder if those are common enough to justify big compromises. I love a fast sailing boat, but I'm not sure sailing speed adds much to safe passage making.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ajax said:

Jeff Johnstone and Ken Read are actively selling this philosophy.

They claim that the days of heavy, slow cruisers that can take a pounding are over, and that speed=safety. The ability to get out of a storm's way is more important than comfort. This was at a lecture they gave in Annapolis, near the end of winter that I attended.

And I think they're either dreaming, selling snake oil, full of shit or never go outside the trade wind belts. Or do really short passages.

I used to go to sea for up to 3 months without touching land in the Southern Ocean on a reasonably well powered vessel. You got what you got and you dealt with it.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/1/2017 at 5:07 PM, MikeJohns said:

You really need a vessel that can sustain 15 knots SOG and have accurate weather routing to properly avoid bad weather for an ocean passage.

SOG isn't a function of the boat. In a fifteen knot current, a log, a feather and an innertube will all do fifteen knots.

Have a seat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Jammer Six said:

SOG isn't a function of the boat. In a fifteen knot current, a log, a feather and an innertube will all do fifteen knots.

Have a seat.

Whatever ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:
14 hours ago, Ajax said:

Jeff Johnstone and Ken Read are actively selling this philosophy.

They claim that the days of heavy, slow cruisers that can take a pounding are over, and that speed=safety. The ability to get out of a storm's way is more important than comfort. This was at a lecture they gave in Annapolis, near the end of winter that I attended.

And I think they're either dreaming, selling snake oil, full of shit or never go outside the trade wind belts. Or do really short passages.

I used to go to sea for up to 3 months without touching land in the Southern Ocean on a reasonably well powered vessel. You got what you got and you dealt with it.

How many cruisers do 3-month passages in the Southern Ocean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  There's an argument to be made that cats are the "new school" of cruising boats.

  And I'll be first in line to bash the sailing qualities & construction of Lagoon's...but in the same price range if I had a choice between a Lagoon or a Westsail...I would take a Lagoon. 

 And that's what I consider to be the bottom of the pile of production boats, no doubt there's a litany of small run or one-off cats that are a bargain compared to something like an Amel, or the (IMHO) overpriced Valiant's on the market.

On 2017-08-02 at 2:51 PM, Albatros said:

hah, that piano brings up one of these nice yottie memories ...some 10 years ago, sigh, time flies, met a Canadian couple in Auckland marina on their one-off yacht, steel but surely no BS boat, the lady played piano and the design was adapted to that, in forecabin the bed was just a bit higher and an electric piano was sitting in a shelf under the mattress, she would pull out the piano shelf, the settee next to it would then be just perfect and that way the bedroom was converted into her practice and concerto room

  Could it be more than a decade ago?  Haa haa I met a couple that had a Kanter steel ketch built for them, and she played professionally with a Toronto orchestra, and absounequivacly would NOT move onto a boat, unless she had a piano practice space.  Had a dedicated from the battery wired outlet and sliding electric piano shelf as part of their contract, haa haa.  They circled the blue marble twice, but if you shared an anchorage in the middle of the night if they were around you could hear Beethoven at 2am just soft enough you thought you were going nuts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

How many cruisers do 3-month passages in the Southern Ocean?

Not the point. Unless you do short passages and never leave port until you know you can get to the next one in good weather or have a boat that can do a sustained speed in excess of 15 knots you simply are not going to outrun a nasty weather system.

Of course this depends on where you live & sail, as I said. Stay in the tropics, rarely a problem anyway. Venture into the high latitudes, sooner or later you are going to be in some dirty weather. This is a good thing IMO.

FKT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites