Jump to content

Cruising boats that plane


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, estarzinger said:

yes . . . . . you are both correct :)

You are absolutely correct that you can look out 7-10 days and sometimes make big moves that significant improve your conditions.  You often get more opportunities to do this on N/S routes than on E/W routes . . . . because N/S you are cutting across the flow and can make decisions with specific features about in front/behind/slow down.  We did some 'clever' quite successful long range routing for example on our trips from Iceland to Uruguay, and from Tuamotu to chile - while on E/W, say our chile to austraila run you can definitely slide a bit north (if something strong is coming) or a bit south (if it is going to be light) but there are fewer opportunities for truly 'clever' moves. 'off season' runs also often give you more opportunity for clever moves, but ofc there is a reason it is off season and you get to DDW's point that sometimes 10 days out all you see on the whole map is shit systems. To do this well, you need some experience, the ability to judge the quality/confidence of the forecast,  because you dont want to go way off the GC if the confidence in really low.

DDW however is also correct -  that for up to like a 2 or 3 day sail, you can have pretty high confidence (ofc never 100%) in the weather you are going to get the whole way, and if you dont have a schedule to keep you can wait until you see just exactly your conditions.  But when you get to 10 days plus and you do have to play with whatever you are given.  Yes, as I said above, you can optimize that, and you can duck some stuff, but you can't 'pick' your conditions with the same freedom you can on 2-3 day runs. Sometimes you just run into large features and there are just no options which will allow you great conditions.

Evans, and others:

Do you have any sense of how much difference an extra knot or so of boat speed gets you in terms of being able to play the weather routing game?  Or phrasing it another way, how different is the ability of your average 30, 40, and 50 footer to navigate weather effectively?

One assumption embedded in all this analysis is that a 5-10% improvement in average boat speed isn't worth all that much to cruisers.  I can buy DDW's argument that when looked at from the perspective of passage times this is probably true.  But if having a faster boat means I can avoid the worst dirty weather on passage, that might be a significant, and very noticeable, benefit even if an 8 hours difference in port-to-port times isn't really so important.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 408
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

So this thread has established that different people have different definitions of cruising. We've also determine that shouting at people on the internet won't change their minds. We're maki

I always thought of my last boat as a cruiser - I knew I'd regret selling her.  

If they'd headed up a bit and got someone to trim/pump the main she might have climbed up on her bow wave and left the quarter wave behind.  Looked more like forced hull speed to me.

Posted Images

12 minutes ago, MFH125 said:

Evans, and others:

Do you have any sense of how much difference an extra knot or so of boat speed gets you in terms of being able to play the weather routing game?  Or phrasing it another way, how different is the ability of your average 30, 40, and 50 footer to navigate weather effectively?

I not ever done much weather routing. (Maybe none?) Avoiding predicted severe cyclonic and winter frontal weather, certainly. But generally go when I'm ready because forecasts are so unreliable. Your "extra knot or so" is in the average. Averages do not inform about distributions. On one hand making good progress in very light conditions pays off. I don't buy the notion that ULDBs are sticky vs. heavy cruisers. Many heavy cruisers say they don't bother with sails until the wind is in the teens...I'm reefed at that point (upwind). On the other hand, in heavy weather, if one is blessed with an off-the-wind course the huge difference in speed can turn a cold gut-wrenching slog to the next safe harbor into an almost a summer sail. I've passed many cruisers going S along California or Baja huddled in foulies getting abused by each passing wave...the ULDB like on rails, nonstop, crew in shirtsleeves.

As for running away from weather. I don't think that works for anyone. Winter fronts can move pretty fast. Tropical cyclones perhaps don't move so fast but the air ahead of them tends to be dead...until it is not...and one doesn't know which way to go until it is too late.

I think altogether it make significant difference in comfort and fun. The tradeoff is one is not going to arrive with paddleboards, bicycles, dive compressors, garlic press, 15 hp dinghy, endless fuel, a freezer full of steaks and freshly pressed formal dinner clothes (or whatever real cruisers carry).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, MFH125 said:

Do you have any sense of how much difference an extra knot or so of boat speed gets you in terms of being able to play the weather routing game?  Or phrasing it another way, how different is the ability of your average 30, 40, and 50 footer to navigate weather effectively?

IME, it is more about finding shelter before bad weather gets in, being able to sail downwind in big air in good conditions for the crew (much more comfortable if the boat accelerates as waves hit you in the stern) and most importantly here, standing a better chance of making a tidal gate.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, MFH125 said:

how much difference an extra knot or so of boat speed gets you in terms of being able to play the weather routing game? 

 

Well, an extra knot is 24nm/day. 

There are two ways to look at that.  (A) It is small gain relative to typical system speed (and size) so will give you relatively little advantage in terms of 'clever' routing.  However (B) most (ofc not all) fronts and lows have relatively small areas of intense winds/waves and gaining 50nm from that specific core will often make a huge different in the peak wind/waves you see - several Beaufort numbers down - so that will/'could' make a big difference. 

Regarding (a) I have talked about the 'speed' question with some vendee racers and others (including dashew) and generally we agree there is a sort of S curve (boat speed vs gains from routing)  at low miles per day you dont gain much in a little extra speed, somewhere around above 300nm/day the curve steepens and there are big gains in the ability to do clever routing, and then it flattens out again at like 500-600nm day . . . . but ofc all that is way above any 'cruising' boat capability.  We all agree that for cruising boats the big gain is to be made in weather and routing knowledge and skill  - to know when to make a move days early and when to just stick on the GC.

The challenge with (b) is that often the conditions when you need to 'escape' such a strong system are not favorable - if you look at the standard storm avoidance chart, in the dangerous semicircle you need to go upwind for best avoidance . . . which actually leans you toward a different design than the pogo sort.  I remember one particular time I was working with a shore router on one of our southern ocean passages and we had a big low coming up behind us, and he gave us a waypoint to aim for for next 24 hours for best avoidance . . . . and to get there was a 30 degree apparent wind angle, into squally 25-35. Our boat actually could do that because she had been designed in part to handle sailing upwind (north up the channels) in chile.  But many boats would not have been able to make that way point, and would have probably hove to and gotten hammered.  It was a mistake that we got caught in that situation. I had seen the low coming from like 5 days away and could have/should have moved significantly north, but at the time I was new to this sort of routing and was trusting the shore pro and he for some reason did not direct us away as early as he could have.  He was used to working with racers and delivery guys and perhaps errored toward minimal distance rather than the maximal avoidance I wanted.

  

1 hour ago, Panoramix said:

IME, it is more about finding shelter before bad weather gets in, being able to sail downwind in big air in good conditions for the crew (much more comfortable if the boat accelerates as waves hit you in the stern) and most importantly here, standing a better chance of making a tidal gate.

finding shelter and timing tidal gates are ofc important for coastal sailing. But are a somewhat different topic than the offshore routing that Zonk and DDW were debating.

Downwind in big air - the first consideration is a well balance boat. Some of the the French offshore designs have been excellent at this in a number of ways.  Being able to get up and plane is IMHO a mixed blessing.  You do (usually with the right boat) dramatically lighten the helm (a marvelous feeling), and you do reduce wave impacts on the stern . . . . BUT you also increase the speed/momentum and likely consequences if (some would say inevitably 'when') wipe out.  The more skilled you are, and the shorter the time exposed (so the more rested and alert), the less this added risk is . . . but at 2am in the morning unanticipated shit can happen.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Zonker said:

I don't really agree. While with a GRIB file beyond 48 hours there is less accuracy, I'm still looking out to 7-10 days and watching for big large scale features that might effect me.

One of the most instructive things you can do is to observe for awhile, a weather app that allows overlaying or comparing several of the many models available. Predict Wind for example with a choice of 8 models. They will generally (though not always) be in fair agreement for today and perhaps tomorrow, then often they begin to diverge. In 5 days they may predict opposite effects.

The weather men say, "embrace uncertainty" because these are probabilisitic, complex statistical models. So the GRIB that you download based on the GFS is simply one of many predictions, which may vary widely. Predict Wind even allows running their own model, initialized two different ways - with GFS or EU data. Often they diverge in only a couple of days even though it is the same model. The predictions I am much more confident in, is when all the models show the same thing 5 days or 7 days hence. If they are diverging radically then all of them have low confidence. And it is pretty normal to have significant divergence by day 5. Second thing you should do is save the prediction from day one, and compare it on day 3 to the then current prediction for day 5. The weather (and the prediction) changes its mind frequently and without notice or permission. 

If it were more deterministic, then hurricane track prediction (with all the resources science can currently muster), would be far better than it is. In the USA, the NOAA Forecast Discussion (comments from the forecaster available on the website) are often more instructive than the forecast itself, as they will frequently inject their confidence, or lack thereof. They understand there may be a wide range of possibilities, but must pick only one as "the" forecast. 

2 hours ago, MFH125 said:

I have witnessed some backstabbing and inappropriate competiveness in my own career, but it's nothing, NOTHING, to what I have seen my parents encounter.  Give people something real to compete over and they tend to make (resonably) rational choices about how to get what they want.  But give people nothing but their ego and their sense of importance/power/superiority/skill/etc. to compete over and you should hang on to your hat.

My question was at least in part rhetorical. My wife used to compete at a high level (locally) in tennis, all that was at stake was a $20 tin trophy. To preserve ones ranking, some would chose not to show up for a match if it had any chance of damaging their rating, i.e., do not compete in the thing you are competing in (for fun) for the sake of winning the thing you are choosing not to compete in. Bizarre but typically human behavior.

Regarding the ARC and motoring, I race sailplanes, and my sailplane has an auxiliary motor. Due to cheating (and believe me there is neither money nor groupie chicks in sailplane racing) all of the secure data loggers used to prove your flight now record engine runs. Sadly, perhaps the trackers used in sail racing need that facility.

Sailplane racing is also weather dependent, and we use the equivalent of weather routers - but even in the course of a day the actually encountered weather is often significantly different than predicted in the morning, for which the weatherman usually has an explanation - after the fact. 

1 hour ago, Panoramix said:

IME, it is more about finding shelter before bad weather gets in, being able to sail downwind in big air in good conditions for the crew (much more comfortable if the boat accelerates as waves hit you in the stern) and most importantly here, standing a better chance of making a tidal gate.

Panoramix, your definition of cruising - a perfectly valid one - explains and favors your choice of boat. If the longest cruise is 3 days, you can choose when, and run for cover if needed, sure, a light fast spartan boat makes sense. There are other situations, even coastal (such as the west coast of the USA) where there is no shelter within many hundreds of miles on a rock bound lee shore, and you are obliged to take what comes. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, estarzinger said:

Being able to get up and plane is IMHO a mixed blessing.  You do (usually with the right boat) dramatically lighten the helm (a marvelous feeling), and you do reduce wave impacts on the stern . . . . BUT you also increase the speed/momentum and likely consequences if (some would say inevitably 'when') wipe out.

If you are worried that you may wipe out downwind or even on a beam reach, you can load just the front (storm jib or an ORC alone) of a planing boat and the boat will take care of the crew and their mistakes!

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

 load just the front (storm jib or an ORC alone) of a planing boat and the boat will take care of the crew and their mistakes!

hmmm . . . we can agree to disagree again. That may be true in relatively chill conditions, but in say the southern ocean with pretty large breaking crests coming from several directions, and sharp wind direction change (and build) in a second in squalls . . . I am less sanguine.  And that is not even mentioning the times when you want to be bare poles, and even an orc is too much (note the ORC size is widely regarded as 'too large' for really severe conditions - you can see this mentioned in most of the after action reports like the Sydney).  We very definitely had a point where we intentionally stopped planing  . . . . it was more a seamanship feel thing than hard and fast rules . . . when the boat was getting knocked by off-axis crests, when there we sudden squalls we could not see well at 2am - there was a time to move into another mode of storm tactics.  Again, I think it is widely understood that the Sydney boats which were running would have faired better if they have used drogues (which none of them carries) than continued on at high speed, and empirically the Sydney boats which went upwind faired much better than those which ran.

The challenge with running at speed is everything feels great, until suddenly it does not, and there are many fewer signals from the boat that it is potentially being driven into trouble.

Storm tactics are complicated and there is no single silver bullet and I am not (and will not ever) proscribe anything . . . except that you respect the conditions and have true empathetic feel for your boat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, DDW said:

...Panoramix, your definition of cruising - a perfectly valid one - explains and favors your choice of boat. If the longest cruise is 3 days, you can choose when, and run for cover if needed, sure, a light fast spartan boat makes sense. There are other situations, even coastal (such as the west coast of the USA) where there is no shelter within many hundreds of miles on a rock bound lee shore, and you are obliged to take what comes. 

I wonder which is the more "common usage":  I would expect there to be many more people who cruise from haven to haven or anchorage, with occasional longer passages than there are that do frequent ocean crossings or long trips along unfriendly coastlines... maybe it's my ignorance (which is deep and extensive) but this is surely the norm for most Europeans, at least? Why three days? You can cruise for weeks like this...

 Hence the term "blue water cruiser", distinct from the majority of cruising boats that are not encumbered with design features focussed on an environment they are rarely, if ever, likely to see?

Cheers,

              W.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, WGWarburton said:

I wonder which is the more "common usage":

As I am sure you know - there is really no 'wondering' about this . . . . 

The majority of boats only go sailing like a dozen weekends a year for short distances . . . sailing at night is considered a great adventure for the vast majority.

Panoramix's costral sailing is more common that any sort of open ocean sailing. . . but is still a relatively small niche in the big picture

And even transoceanic passages are an even very smaller niche relatively speaking.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I generally don't pay much attention to ARC results because:

(a) huge variation in crew experience. Lots of people doing first ocean passage. More likely to avoid spinnakers at all, much less at night. Will reef early and often to feel safe.

(b) huge variation in crew motivation (the charter group in a shared expenses big mono will push it harder vs mom and pop on their condo cat)

(c) the ability to motor in light winds is not adequately counted against your finishing time. Basically motoring is smart to get lower finishing times. 

(d) under declared motoring times

(e) it's not a race; it's a rally

Anecdote about crew motivation is more important than the boat.

We sailed with a Waquiez Pretorian 35 from Puerto Vallarta to the Marquesas. They arrived about a day behind us. On paper they should have been much slower. But we were loafing the whole way and just took it easy, seldom flying the chute that much (our first long ocean passage) - and we had only 1 rudder for the last 3 days so took it extra slow the last part of the trip. The skipper on the mono was a serious ex-racer/TP 52 bowman who sailed the hell out of their boat the whole time. His wife said it was not a very relaxing passage. If both crews were taking it easy I'm sure the mono would have been 3 days behind us or so. But it also showed a well sailed smaller mono can keep up with a lax cruising boat. 

On a shorter trip from the Marquesas to the Tuamotos (500 miles) we again left at the same time. But we had both rudders. We pushed the boat hard, arriving just as sun was setting. The Waquiez was about 50 miles behind us when we arrived; considerably slower.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Panoramix said:

If you are worried that you may wipe out downwind or even on a beam reach, you can load just the front (storm jib or an ORC alone) of a planing boat and the boat will take care of the crew and their mistakes!

Don't have anything to link to handy, unfortunately, but I'm fairly certain I've seen interviews with Open 60 skippers saying it can be a challenge to slow the boats down sufficiently in rough conditions.  If you don't slow them down they begin to pound brutally when they surf off the top of a wave.

Of course, this isn't the kind of issue I, or the vast majority of sailors, should be considering given how we use our boats.  Not that that stops us from arguing about it online...

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, DDW said:

Not Wylie or Dashew. They like'm narrow. Increasing draft and ballast ratio does very little to change stability at low angles of heel, say 20 and below. That comes mostly from form stability (~ beam). 

Or this

 

3DEFC3E0-CD7A-465E-8C1C-14737899540B.jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, estarzinger said:

As I am sure you know - there is really no 'wondering' about this . . . . 

The majority of boats only go sailing like a dozen weekends a year for short distances . . . sailing at night is considered a great adventure for the vast majority.

Agreed - and even the discussion of "running from the weather" is very different if it means 20 or 60 miles back to a nice sheltered port on the Channel vs. middle of the N. Atlantic in winter or the Oregon coast in the summer. In truth the vast majority of sailboats where I live (an ideal sailing venue too) rarely leave their slip at all. Really doesn't matter if they plane, are heavy, or even have sails. My comments are directed towards boats that actually go somewhere, long term, far from home. 

3 minutes ago, Zonker said:

I generally don't pay much attention to ARC results because:

I pay attention to the ARC because while everything you say is true, there are 300+ boats and it becomes a statistically valid sample even given the caveats. There is also a racing division where the crews are more serious and engine use prohibited by rule. If the data from the ARC differed greatly from other satellite tracked events, then I'd need to understand why - but it does not. 

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

If you are worried that you may wipe out downwind or even on a beam reach, you can load just the front (storm jib or an ORC alone) of a planing boat and the boat will take care of the crew and their mistakes!

We were having a placid little sail (~5K TW) going from Brentwood Bay to Ganges, and when we got past the airport about a mile or so, got hammered by a 25-30K black gasser (I know, old school...) Anyway, headed up, dropped the main, left the blade up with the Hoyt Jib Spar, turned around, DDW, and were doing 8+K quietly comfortable, with the chop.  Thing was, there were the usual big heavy Beneteau etc guys around us under full white sails doing 7-9 knots having a really good time, wiping out once in a while.  Made the turn towards Ganges, and about a mile in, the wind dropped back to 5K, we put the main back up, and the big guys turned on their motors. They did have smiles on their faces.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MFH125 said:

Don't have anything to link to handy, unfortunately, but I'm fairly certain I've seen interviews with Open 60 skippers saying it can be a challenge to slow the boats down sufficiently in rough conditions.  If you don't slow them down they begin to pound brutally when they surf off the top of a wave.

Of course, this isn't the kind of issue I, or the vast majority of sailors, should be considering given how we use our boats.  Not that that stops us from arguing about it online...

AFAIU, IMOCAs are totally different beasts that are fast and fragile and need to be sailed at appropriate speeds. Nevertheless a cruising planing boat won't reach 30 knots, if you sail with the appropriate sail area, speed will stay between 5 (bow buried) and 15 knots ("falling off" a steep wave). Trouble with the purely "Archimedean boat" is that when you are going down a wave that is steeper than you would like, you will get to the point where it is going too fast to be easily controllable....

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

but in say the southern ocean with pretty large breaking crests coming from several directions, and sharp wind direction change (and build) in a second in squalls

How many cruisers had the chance to experience the South?

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

How many cruisers had the chance to experience the South?

very few. I have led a charmed life :)

But you can get the same conditions around the Azores, it is just less frequent during the normal season than it is in the south.

How many cruisers get out around the Azores  . . . yea much more than to the south, but still relatively few. 

But there is really not much point in talking about the sailing characteristics of the boats that stay in their slips most of the time - so we naturally are talking about a minority anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, estarzinger said:

very few. I have led a charmed life :)

But you can get the same conditions around the Azores, it is just less frequent during the normal season than it is in the south.

Experienced the bay of Biscay in 25 to 30 knots... that was plenty enough for me!

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, estarzinger said:

But there is really not much point in talking about the sailing characteristics of the boats that stay in their slips most of the time - so we naturally are talking about a minority anyway.

But why can't we list nice planing cruising boats instead? Or at least sometimes, not just say that it isn't cruising if it isn't over the ocean, three months and prepared for cyclone. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Misbehavin' said:

IMHO the newer Elan's are in the sweet spot between a comfortable cruising boat and a fast boat off the wind.

They look like really nice boats, "North sea style" (similar philosophy as Hanse, Delher and X-Yachts of a not too wide boat with good righting moment,  flattish underbody toward the stern, not quite proper planing boats but not either the kind of craft that digs a hole in the sea when you push it!). It is very different from the "Breton style" (stripped down to control weight, wider and shallower hull and fuller bow) but the 2 options seem to work well as long as you understand that it is all about compromises and you can't have everything!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Upp3 said:

But why can't we list nice planing cruising boats instead? Or at least sometimes, not just say that it isn't cruising if it isn't over the ocean, three months and prepared for cyclone. 

Sigh . . . . you mis-understood my writing.

If you read all my posts above . .  . .  I think I have most certainly made clear that I dont think 'cruising' is only 'across an ocean'.  And I have (repeatedly) made it quite very clear that "nice planing cruising boats" most certainly have a nice little niche. 

You 'planing' guys seem to be a bit defensive and need consistent reassurance lol.

In the bit you quoted . . . my point, to try to make it more clear . . . .. It was suggested that because only a few go to the south ( or across oceans or to the azores) those experiences could be (should be) discounted.    And I was just suggesting that in fact all (or most) of us here are in a 'minority' with 'niche views and experiences' because we actually use our boats (and have some passion). . . and 'planing cruising' is most definitively like that (a small minority niche of all boats).  We are ALL IN THE SAME (minority) BOAT HERE (lol despite being in very different boats)

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, estarzinger said:

Sigh . . . . you mis-understood my writing.

If you read all my posts above . .  . .  I think I have most certainly made clear that I dont think 'cruising' is only 'across an ocean'.  And I have (repeatedly) made it quite very clear that "nice planing cruising boats" most certainly have a nice little niche. 

You 'planing' guys seem to be a bit defensive and need consistent reassurance lol.

I don't need reassurances, but I might need a planing boat. And I'd like to see more of them mentioned, just to have something nice to google and daydream while I'm waiting for the ice to melt...

That "across the ocean" stuff, that is my bad. I got stuck to that idea after the op asked for suggestions for planing cruising boats and got replies that you'll need 60 foot brickhouse with provisions to wait for better weather for weeks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Panoramix said:

How many cruisers had the chance to experience the South?

Just do some nice alpine climbs for a “Southern Ocean experience”.  Much, much easier and cheaper to get there, and also comes with a chance of big problems and big rewards :-)

D924C870-4D60-4294-8C31-2A740F88B23E.jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, estarzinger said:

You 'planing' guys seem to be a bit defensive and need consistent reassurance lol.

Within the first 20 posts some were already busy arguing why planing boats and cruising don't mix well!!!

IMHO, it is all about payload and length.... the higher the payload, the more length you need and at some point it becomes a rather big and expensive boat (Beowulf). If you can keep the payload low it stays affordable. There was a French family who went on an Atlantic loop on a RM 10.50 a few years ago, they lived on the boat for a year (2 adults, 2 kids) they didn't carry anything "unnecessary", boat was probably a bit on the heavy side but it didn't stop them from having a very good time and with just a year off work visit Spain, Portugal, the Canaries, the French Caribbean, the Bahamas, Florida, New York, a bit of Canada and the Azores.  Having a boat that sails relatively well helped them quite a bit.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2021 at 10:01 AM, El Borracho said:

I not ever done much weather routing. (Maybe none?) Avoiding predicted severe cyclonic and winter frontal weather, certainly. But generally go when I'm ready because forecasts are so unreliable. Your "extra knot or so" is in the average. Averages do not inform about distributions. On one hand making good progress in very light conditions pays off. I don't buy the notion that ULDBs are sticky vs. heavy cruisers. Many heavy cruisers say they don't bother with sails until the wind is in the teens...I'm reefed at that point (upwind). On the other hand, in heavy weather, if one is blessed with an off-the-wind course the huge difference in speed can turn a cold gut-wrenching slog to the next safe harbor into an almost a summer sail. I've passed many cruisers going S along California or Baja huddled in foulies getting abused by each passing wave...the ULDB like on rails, nonstop, crew in shirtsleeves.

As for running away from weather. I don't think that works for anyone. Winter fronts can move pretty fast. Tropical cyclones perhaps don't move so fast but the air ahead of them tends to be dead...until it is not...and one doesn't know which way to go until it is too late.

I think altogether it make significant difference in comfort and fun. The tradeoff is one is not going to arrive with paddleboards, bicycles, dive compressors, garlic press, 15 hp dinghy, endless fuel, a freezer full of steaks and freshly pressed formal dinner clothes (or whatever real cruisers carry).

My "boat" bike weighs about 25# ("obsolete" litespeed MTB), an inflatable paddle board about the same.  Hope to carry them cruising on my old IORish, but no bustle 34' boat someday soon.  No freezer full of steaks and I don't have any formal cloths on land!  I really thought about a Hobie 33 to convert for cruising when I bought my old boat for a similar price.  Still second guess the choice.  The Hobie could be in the back yard getting its refit instead of an hour away at the marina, but then I can also go sailing now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a relatively quick cruising boat is a joy.  I vividly remember beating into the Potomac River in our Contessa 33 on a windy day, carrying full main and the job reefed down to #4 size powering past a hobby horsing Island Packet and a Halberg motoring dead into the wind laden down with umpteen jerry cans of diesel and with the windage of an oxygen tent.

Admittedly when in  full ocean crossing mode the Contessa was heavily laden with 800 Kg extra weight on an empty weight of 4200 Kg.

I'd have a 12.5 Pogo tomorrow!

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

You made the right choice. Hobies are so uncomfortable inside and out (too narrow, zero headroom, and a cramped cockpit). Great boat for sailing downwind but it still wont plane like the more modern boats do. Surfs great though.

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

... as long as you understand that it is all about compromises and you can't have everything!

Truer words have never been spoken, esp. about sailboats!

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Misbehavin' said:

IMHO the newer Elan's are in the sweet spot between a comfortable cruising boat and a fast boat off the wind.

There is a lot to like abut the newer Elans, but the weed-and-pot-catcher keels rule those designs out for me.

I have never seen one in the flesh, but the reviews seem to me to be hinting that structural quality is not first-rate.  Not sure if that's a fair impression

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

I have never seen one in the flesh, but the reviews seem to me to be hinting that structural quality is not first-rate.  Not sure if that's a fair impression

Who said so? That would be a serious allegation that is better backed up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Panoramix said:

They look like really nice boats, "North sea style" (similar philosophy as Hanse, Delher and X-Yachts of a not too wide boat with good righting moment,  flattish underbody toward the stern, not quite proper planing boats but not either the kind of craft that digs a hole in the sea when you push it!). It is very different from the "Breton style" (stripped down to control weight, wider and shallower hull and fuller bow) but the 2 options seem to work well as long as you understand that it is all about compromises and you can't have everything!

I agree on your point regarding hull shapes. But I wouldn't put Elan in the same group with its hard chined VOR-inspired design by Humphries Yacht Design. The others appears to only be able to semi-plane/surf.

Elan 350, now sold as Elan E4:


Elan 400, now sold as Elan E5:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Matagi said:
43 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

I have never seen one in the flesh, but the reviews seem to me to be hinting that structural quality is not first-rate.  Not sure if that's a fair impression

Who said so? That would be a serious allegation that is better backed up.

I am simply reporting the impression I have gained from the reviews I have read ... and no, I have intention of trawling a few years of browser logs to find which reviews gave me that impression.

Give that whatever weight you see fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Misbehavin' said:

I agree on your point regarding hull shapes. But I wouldn't put Elan in the same group with its hard chined VOR-inspired design by Humphries Yacht Design. The others appears to only be able to semi-plane/surf.

Elan 350, now sold as Elan E4:


Elan 400, now sold as Elan E5:

 

Point taken, TBH we don't have many here and from the lines I was under the impression that Elan weren't as planing as on these videos.

Regarding the North sea school of boat design, many moons ago I was the bowman of a X362 and even if it wasn't a proper planing machine, with enough breeze downwind the boat was accelerating safely in a straight line beyond hull speed.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

This Wilderness 40 from the classifieds looks like it could do for an inexpensive O40 - type ULDB minimalist cruiser that could plane if kept light.  I might convert it back to a tiller if there's enough room behind the traveler.  

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

I am simply reporting the impression I have gained from the reviews I have read ... and no, I have intention of trawling a few years of browser logs to find which reviews gave me that impression.

Give that whatever weight you see fit.

I have. It still floats.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

Not sure if Dogbark is a “cruising boat that planes”, or a “planing boat that is cruising”.

 

There was another old 60 down in Puerto Williams doing charters to the Peninsula.  I believe they are gone now.  I dont think they planed much in expedition/charter trim - they put on more weight than DogBark seems to have.  Need to be careful with high speeds at night (and other bad visibility) around ice.  It is close to impossible to see a growler and hitting one at 15kts will probably not be pleasant. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/11/2021 at 7:38 PM, El Borracho said:

After the Mexico trip a couple of years ago I unloaded everything not bolted down. Weighed it as it came off.  Made a spreadsheet. Then added the fixed items that are not the basic factory boat (fridge compressor, windlass, house batteries, electronics, etc. were added from catalog data). Factory boat items like winches, engine, plumbing, fixtures, etc. were not included). The goal was to find things to eliminate. Some odd items were missed, like the VHF whip and its cable, wires to the fans, etc. But the cruise stuff was all removed and weighed: full fuel, water, lotsa leftover food, anchor gear, heavy wiring, cushions, even the mistress and I are on the spreadsheet. We were heading into this endless refit where every locker would be painted. The spreadsheet showed the percent contribution of each item to the total. In theory this total would be added to Bill Lee's imagined 16,000 pound displacement of the factory boat. I did a good complete job of it. 

Just under 5000 pounds. So we imagine we cruised at 21,000 pounds displacement. I don't know what SC50's get officially weighed is at. When I bought her the PO's scum line implied they tried to cruise her at around 30,000 pounds. They said they were famously slow in their rally fleet of heavy cruisers.....no shit?!? Whereas we easily do Fast is Fun mode.

Couldn't find much to eliminate. The irreducible bulk of the 5000 pounds is water, fuel, house batteries, sails, dinghy, and the entire anchoring kit. All the little stuff just adds up by it's sheer variety (towels, flipflops, spoons, iPad, sex toys, etc) and all one can do is minimize where possible.

Apropos this thread: the tools, epoxy kit, sewing, bolt cutters, and the like came to only 124 pounds. The spare rig, electrical, plumbing, and engine parts are kinda scattered around the spreadsheet but didn't add up to much: maybe 100 pounds.

Sorry for coming is so late with this post, seems like this is a hot topic :)

I talked with Dan Nowlan (who at the time was the Offshore Director of USSailing and an ex-SC50 owner), and he said most of the 50's measured in at about 18,000 pounds if they were stripped down, and up to 20,000 if they had more cruising "stuff".  So you are probably cruising at about 23k which still gives a D/L of around 100 fully laden, and should allow you to get up on a plane if you wanted to sail that way.

A good rule of thumb is any boat is probably 10-15% over the brochure weight when stripped down (no sails, empty tanks, and all loose equipment removed).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/12/2021 at 3:47 AM, Upp3 said:

Certainly not the definition of Jackdaw's, when he asked for your favourite planing cruiser and gave as a starter pogos and sub 30 foot benetau! And now we are doing ARCs, dodging pirates in Africa... how about wintering in Greenland?

Hey @Jackdaw , could you hazard a guess how many cruisers in Minneapolis are living on a boat?

 

FROM Minneapolis, tons.

IN Minneapolis? ZERO

 

Although I did know of a dude that wintered in his Hunter 26 at the yard at Hoopers Yachts. Had it wrapped in blankets and had a heater running 100% duty.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Jackdaw said:

FROM Minneapolis, tons.

IN Minneapolis? ZERO

 

Although I did know of a dude that wintered in his Hunter 26 at the yard at Hoopers Yachts. Had it wrapped in blankets and had a heater running 100% duty.

They do that here, then act surprised when they set their boat on fire.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Ishmael said:

They do that here, then act surprised when they set their boat on fire.

Here too.

And sometimes they're burning plastic for heat and it just looks like it's on fire. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/15/2021 at 12:14 PM, Panoramix said:

If you are worried that you may wipe out downwind or even on a beam reach, you can load just the front (storm jib or an ORC alone) of a planing boat and the boat will take care of the crew and their mistakes!

What's `an ORC`? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The yacht in the video at the start of this thread never got onto a plane, let alone surf unless the Northern Hemisphere has a different parameter for planing? Full displacement mode, rather boring really 

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

The yacht in the video at the start of this thread never got onto a plane, let alone surf unless the Northern Hemisphere has a different parameter for planing? Full displacement mode, rather boring really 

True, it's not a planing boat.  There are planing cruisers, but that's not one of them.

I think you should get a full refund of all the money you paid to watch the video

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

What's `an ORC`? 

A small jib with the clew relatively high. It is the last one before the storm jib.

StormJib&TakeInMainSail.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

pretty long, but interesting real world assessment of jimmy Cornell's attempt at hydro-gen powered cat

bottom line was it worked in 'ideal' conditions, but those conditions were not frequent enough and its output dropped big time and it way underperformed expectations in a sea state and also obviously in light winds, Since this video Jimmy put the boat up for sale now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/28/2021 at 5:51 AM, Panoramix said:

Indeed... it is sad they didn't try harder to make it work.

I didn't search very hard but from what I saw my recollection, which ought to be verified, is:   Cornell wanted to try again with some changes, but this boat is up for sale.  The two Ocean volt generators didn't produce enough power, (I think a net average gain was 325 watts and wasn't enough to power the AP, fridge, nav instruments & lights, pumps, induction cook top, electric winches and what ever else).  They didn't maximize the solar panels, (1.3 KW IIRC) and they thought they could fit more which might make the difference. 

FWIW, Outremer strongly suggested fitting a diesel generator but Cornell said that would defeat the purpose of the experiment, plus adding weight and another fuel.  On their return to France I think they had 12% battery capacity left, even with careful restrictions on power use.  Still, they made it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/20/2021 at 12:39 AM, Crazy Horse said:

The yacht in the video at the start of this thread never got onto a plane, let alone surf unless the Northern Hemisphere has a different parameter for planing? Full displacement mode, rather boring really 

Ok, well, we’re awfully sorry.

Try this one.  A bit better - perhaps. But a Class 40, it is not...

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, eric1207 said:

I didn't search very hard but from what I saw my recollection, which ought to be verified, is:   Cornell wanted to try again with some changes, but this boat is up for sale.  The two Ocean volt generators didn't produce enough power, (I think a net average gain was 325 watts and wasn't enough to power the AP, fridge, nav instruments & lights, pumps, induction cook top, electric winches and what ever else).  They didn't maximize the solar panels, (1.3 KW IIRC) and they thought they could fit more which might make the difference. 

FWIW, Outremer strongly suggested fitting a diesel generator but Cornell said that would defeat the purpose of the experiment, plus adding weight and another fuel.  On their return to France I think they had 12% battery capacity left, even with careful restrictions on power use.  Still, they made it.  

325W average is not shabby, that could theoretically fill an ordinary AGM 100Ah battery (which are actually 50Ah) in 2 hours. They probably need to work hard on the consumption side of the equation! We are so used to consume vast quantities of energy...

I think that they should add wind to the equation as it balances well with sun (a day without sun and wind is relatively uncommon) and apparent wind on a cat tend to be high!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Panoramix said:

325W average is not shabby, that could theoretically fill an ordinary AGM 100Ah battery (which are actually 50Ah) in 2 hours. They probably need to work hard on the consumption side of the equation! We are so used to consume vast quantities of energy...

I think that they should add wind to the equation as it balances well with sun (a day without sun and wind is relatively uncommon) and apparent wind on a cat tend to be high!

Agreed, do we really need to run 3 x navigation screens, icebox and freezer?

As well as washing machine, dishwasher, A/C etc.
YMMV

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

Agreed, do we really need to run 3 x navigation screens, icebox and freezer?

As well as washing machine, dishwasher, A/C etc.
YMMV

It depends on whether you are into sailing as a "luxury lifestyle" in which the answer is absolutely, or an "outdoor adventure sport" (like backpacking or camping in a tent) in which the answer is absolutely not...

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Crash said:

It depends on whether you are into sailing as a "luxury lifestyle" in which the answer is absolutely, or an "outdoor adventure sport" (like backpacking or camping in a tent) in which the answer is absolutely not...

The real sailors sleep on a rack six feet off the windward side.

Or as far as you can drag them once they have swigged themselves into oblivion.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Bryanjb said:

Personally, I believe it's easier to get speed, comfort and load carrying with waterline, weight and sail.  YMMV

I suppose it works but not everybody has an illimited budget!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Panoramix said:
12 hours ago, Bryanjb said:

Personally, I believe it's easier to get speed, comfort and load carrying with waterline, weight and sail.  YMMV

I suppose it works but not everybody has an illimited budget!

Or an unlimited ability to handle the loads generated by all that weight.

Even the most dedicated pushbutton sailor can't push a button to bend on that new mainsail.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TwoLegged said:

Or an unlimited ability to handle the loads generated by all that weight.

Even the most dedicated pushbutton sailor can't push a button to bend on that new mainsail.

Nor an unlimited ability to maintain "systems"!

Wasn't "illimited" a cute word ? Invented by myself from the French "illimité"or the Spanish "illimitado".

I hate that one can't edit SA posts after a while, when I read myself an hour later, I tend to notice a few forgotten s and that I've been creative with spelling!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Usdivers61 said:

Anyone know if the Beneteau First 405 can surf and plane downwind, if so what kind of speed have you heard of?

Too heavy to plane, but maybe it can surf a bit.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Usdivers61 said:

what about the Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 37.1, think it would be in the same situation as the 405?

No boat with a SA/D of only 15 is going to plane.  You need a SA/D in the high 20s for that.

Sun Odyssey of any size is a slug of a charter boat, sold for its accommodation.  If you want performance sailing, look elsewhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, TwoLegged said:

No boat with a SA/D of only 15 is going to plane.  You need a SA/D in the high 20s for that.

Sun Odyssey of any size is a slug of a charter boat, sold for its accommodation.  If you want performance sailing, look elsewhere.

Cheers!

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

Sun Odyssey of any size is a slug of a charter boat, sold for its accommodation.  If you want performance sailing, look elsewhere.

I think that you are a bit harsh. The 37.1 was designed by Fauroux and AFAIK is a decent boat that is liked here by people who do semi offshore cruising (Ireland, Spain from Brittany). It certainly won't plane but will get there in decent time and well ahead of proper charter boats (Oceanis, Dufour & Co). hull is flattish toward the stern so although it won't plane, I imagine that it will surf in a straight line without initiating a death roll.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Usdivers61 said:

Anyone know if the Beneteau First 405 can surf and plane downwind, if so what kind of speed have you heard of?

Definitely no planing. Might surge a bit on a big following seas. Becomes overpowered in offshore running. Helm becomes unresponsive when pushed hard. Can exceed hull speed slightly but it is not fun. Proof is in the polars. Nice interior details. Great boat for vacation cruising, parties, drinking...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Panoramix said:

I suppose it works but not everybody has an illimited budget!

There's a lot of old waterline that can be bought for a fraction of the price of a new pogo.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

Or an unlimited ability to handle the loads generated by all that weight.

Even the most dedicated pushbutton sailor can't push a button to bend on that new mainsail.

We've rigged our 250# mainsail quite often over 20 years. You just learn how to do it.

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

We've rigged our 250# mainsail quite often over 20 years. You just learn how to do it.

I recall your last trip South was a rough one? I bet you were glad for the WL, displacement and RM. 

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

I recall your last trip South was a rough one? I bet you were glad for the WL, displacement and RM. 

It was a bit sporty, we were happy to be on a 65,000# boat.  Looking forward to an easier sail to Maine next month.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, El Borracho said:

Definitely no planing. Might surge a bit on a big following seas. Becomes overpowered in offshore running. Helm becomes unresponsive when pushed hard. Can exceed hull speed slightly but it is not fun. Proof is in the polars. Nice interior details. Great boat for vacation cruising, parties, drinking...

Yup.  I loved our First 405 - it's not the best dead downwind due to some residual IOR influences.  Certainly it's not designed for planing.  Does surf under the right conditions - whee!  But yeah, she was a hull speed boat, and pretty heavy - ours weighed in over 20,000lbs pretty empty; significantly over design weight.  Great boat though; really trucked upwind.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Bryanjb said:

There's a lot of old waterline that can be bought for a fraction of the price of a new pogo.

You still have to pay the harbour fees, the insurance, replace the gigantic sails from time to time, maintain the winch farm, the standing rig, the big everything... There is a reason why these big boats are so inexpensive compared to their construction cost!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Panoramix said:

You still have to pay the harbour fees, the insurance, replace the gigantic sails from time to time, maintain the winch farm, the standing rig, the big everything... There is a reason why these big boats are so inexpensive compared to their construction cost!

If you're cruising there are no marina fees, insurance is based on value not loa, sails are more expensive but cruising doesn't burn through sails like racing, they last a long time, the rod rigging for our boat is about $18k, a forty footer is about $12k... 

The biggest expensive in boating is depreciation, older boats have already been depreciated.

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

The biggest expensive in boating is depreciation, older boats have already been depreciated.

You have to compare like for like. Not sure how much your 35000 lbs boat is worth but 15 metric tons is not going to be free if it is maintained well enough to sail away.

There are some older boats that are fairly light around.

If the boat is your home may be you can afford to spend some money :

https://voilesetvoiliers.ouest-france.fr/annonces/annonces/cigale-14-hasta-luego-2/

Not the cheapest and already a big boat but will cross a winter low without damage. You won't loose much on depreciation and to get something equivalent in term of speed and safety, you would need a much bigger boat if you want to go the "heavy route". The cigale is already a big boat but the budget won't be anything like the equivalent version with "lot of weight and waterline" (something like this ? https://www.yachtfocus.com/fr/bateaux-doccasion-à-vendre/van-der-vliet-dutch-quality-yachts/184695/jongert-21s.html ).

If you are on a tighter budget you can go for an old GRP boat that is light to medium displacement. These are a favourite for those who want to sail in relative comfort on a budget :

https://voilesetvoiliers.ouest-france.fr/annonces/annonces/sun-fizz-3/

And there are lot of relatively light boats available second hand that will be safe, fairly fast and relatively cheap to maintain. On a heavy boat every single pulley you replace will set you back at very least a 100€ and much more if there is a significant load in it. I gave the example of a pulley but it will be true for many things and it is just one small thing among many opportunities to lighten your wallet! Good for your if you have deep pockets but a big heavy boat is the last thing you want if you are on a budget.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Displacement provides comfort? Really? Not my experience at all. Wallowing in following seas for 10 extra days on a crossing is comfort? The light catamaran and monohull sailors sitting in the island bar for a week while your soggy ass chunders towards port seem to disagree. Show me the proof.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, El Borracho said:

Displacement provides comfort? Really? Not my experience at all. Wallowing in following seas for 10 extra days on a crossing is comfort? The light catamaran and monohull sailors sitting in the island bar for a week while your soggy ass chunders towards port seem to disagree. Show me the proof.

Mid Atlantic returning from the Caribbean, 7 1/2 days including 14 hours waiting a day for Bertha to go by.

IMG_20200522_084606_compress23.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites