Re: [PUP] PPM, Convergence, narrow boats, etc.
"Idlewild" was built out of aluminum, and not steel as mentioned in
Hannu Venermo's post. You can relive her around the world voyage
through Google Earth at: http://tinyurl.com/ksnhg
The other thing that Hannu Venermo got wrong was that Idlewild was comfortable.
Idlewild's narrow beam-10 feet at the waterline-translates into
excellent efficiency and phenomenal range. Her shallow draft-3 feet 6
inches-permits portaging and river navigation, and makes her safer in
ice. Together, the beam and draft combine to generate rolling that
can only be described as wicked.
Ben Gray reported from Australia that Idlewild regularly rolled 20 to
40 degrees, sometime hitting 60 degrees and more. Thus, during the
hiatus Down Under, paravanes were fitted to the aluminum yacht.
"It took us 29 days to make it from South Africa to Australia," Gray
told the Edmonton (Alberta) Journal. "Because of the rolling, we were
only able to cook on 18 of those days."
Food was eaten cold, often right out of the can.
For more on Idlewild and her circumnavigation, go
http://www.trawlersandtrawlering.com/news/idlewildcomplete.html
By the by, Idlewild is still for sale --
http://idlewildexpedition.ca/toppage1.htm -- underscoring how few
takers there are in the real word for long, skinny boats that are
minimally equipped.
--Georgs
Georgs Kolesnikovs
Your host at Trawlers & Trawlering, formerly Trawler World, since 1997
Site see: http://www.trawlersandtrawlering.com
What continues to impress me are the folks who buy a production
trawler-type boat and then cruise the world, and then find a ready
market for their boat when they return. There are lots of folks out
there doing it on Krogen's and Nordhavns.
They might not have the ultimate passagemaker as defined on this list,
but if they take their time and wait for the weather windows, its not
that hard to circumnavigate. You just have to keep going, bit by bit.
The first couple I heard of that did this, the Sinks on a Nordhavn 46,
didn't think it was a big deal. They are a very unassuming, retired
couple. Came home after their circumnavigation, tied up the boat and
went on to do other things. Boat sold easily and I think they got all
their initial capital out of it. Lots of others are out there now
doing it as well.
The Flanders, who are currently cruising on Egret, another N46, are in
the middle of their journey (after going around the horn a couple of
times) and their statistics on number of "weather days" is
interesting. They'd completed 7+ years and more than 41,000 nautical
miles of world cruising. Out of 2639 days at sea:
- Only 3% of the time (86 days) have they been more than a day's run
from a safe port. - Only 9 partial days of really nasty seas (.003%) when they couldn't
take shelter. Four of those days were by choice (working to a schedule
and ignoring the forecast) and five days not by choice. - None of those nasty days even approached survival conditions.
Even though their average speed has only been 5.8 knots (and thus they
couldn't outrun or avoid weather) the state of weather forecasting
(they hired a private forecaster, Omni) has improved to the degree
that you can avoid most of the nastiness these days. As long as you
let the forecast be your sole guide of when to start a passage.
While it seems very sexy to have a purpose-built ultimate passagemaker
that can cruise through a hurricane, those boats tend to be very hard
to resell and often at great losses. In contrast, the mid-range
production boats ($500-600K range used) often return most of their
capital investment after a number of years and still get you there
just fine. I've been unable to find record of a single incident where
a Krogen or Nordhavn has been lost at sea due to weather (hitting the
shore is another matter).
You have to also consider the ease of resell and return of capital
when you look at costs. Few people buy a boat and keep it forever.
John Marshall
I agree that there are some excellent production boats out there that
fit the bill and used are a good buy with systems sorted out. Before I
built a semi-custom boat in the U.S. after selling the used Skookum
that had carried us for so many years, I looked at some of them
including the venerable Nordhaven 46. Most did not fit the bill
because of the low headroom and tight quarters in the engine room not
to mention the access. I think that many first time trawler owners
with circumnavigation hopes forget how important it is to have
accessible systems throughout the vessel. It may not be a problem in
the marina but caught out in a blow when suddenly there are problems
you will appreciate a work area that is safe and systems that can be
accessed easily. Granted I'm rather round and at 70 a senior with
joints not quite as flexible as twenty years ago but please take this
into consideration.
Another area is fuel/range. 1000 gallons of fuel I don't believe is
enough even at @ 7 knts and 3gph. Leaving a 50Gal safety that only
gives one about 2100 mile range not including using other systems off
the pto such as hydraulics, active stabilizers, and diesel heaters
etc.
Carrying increased fuel ads weight but also some flexibility to fuel
at more advantageous ports.
One area I forgot to mention was the rudder. My male ego has always
felt that if one could not effectively "Spring" the boat into a dock
you should give up the helm so we have no thrusters in our boat but
did install an "Articulated rudder" which is amazing. My wife still
wishes we had gone for the thrusters but we have never failed slipping
into crazy berthing areas and we saved some bucks in the process.
God Bless - Ross - 10&2
On Sat, Nov 8, 2008 at 11:55 AM, John Marshall johnamar1101@gmail.com wrote:
What continues to impress me are the folks who buy a production
trawler-type boat and then cruise the world, and then find a ready
market for their boat when they return. There are lots of folks out
there doing it on Krogen's and Nordhavns.
They might not have the ultimate passagemaker as defined on this list,
but if they take their time and wait for the weather windows, its not
that hard to circumnavigate. You just have to keep going, bit by bit.
The first couple I heard of that did this, the Sinks on a Nordhavn 46,
didn't think it was a big deal. They are a very unassuming, retired
couple. Came home after their circumnavigation, tied up the boat and
went on to do other things. Boat sold easily and I think they got all
their initial capital out of it. Lots of others are out there now
doing it as well.
The Flanders, who are currently cruising on Egret, another N46, are in
the middle of their journey (after going around the horn a couple of
times) and their statistics on number of "weather days" is
interesting. They'd completed 7+ years and more than 41,000 nautical
miles of world cruising. Out of 2639 days at sea:
- Only 3% of the time (86 days) have they been more than a day's run
from a safe port. - Only 9 partial days of really nasty seas (.003%) when they couldn't
take shelter. Four of those days were by choice (working to a schedule
and ignoring the forecast) and five days not by choice. - None of those nasty days even approached survival conditions.
Even though their average speed has only been 5.8 knots (and thus they
couldn't outrun or avoid weather) the state of weather forecasting
(they hired a private forecaster, Omni) has improved to the degree
that you can avoid most of the nastiness these days. As long as you
let the forecast be your sole guide of when to start a passage.
While it seems very sexy to have a purpose-built ultimate passagemaker
that can cruise through a hurricane, those boats tend to be very hard
to resell and often at great losses. In contrast, the mid-range
production boats ($500-600K range used) often return most of their
capital investment after a number of years and still get you there
just fine. I've been unable to find record of a single incident where
a Krogen or Nordhavn has been lost at sea due to weather (hitting the
shore is another matter).
You have to also consider the ease of resell and return of capital
when you look at costs. Few people buy a boat and keep it forever.
John Marshall
http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/passagemaking-under-power
To unsubscribe send email to
passagemaking-under-power-request@lists.samurai.com with the word
UNSUBSCRIBE and nothing else in the subject or body of the message.
Passagemaking Under Power and PUP are trademarks of Water World Productions, formerly known as Trawler World Productions.
--- On Sat, 11/8/08, Georgs Kolesnikovs
By the by, Idlewild is still for sale --
http://idlewildexpedition.ca/toppage1.htm -- underscoring
how few takers there are in the real word for long, skinny boats
that are minimally equipped.
Having never been on the boat, I can't hazard a guess as to why she hasn't sold. I would caution about making conclusions about particular design elements from one boat. In addition to the long skinny attribute, and the basic systems attribute, the design for portage forced some trade offs, from the photos it also appears to have few creature comforts, and perhaps a bit high priced for what it is.
Re stablization, I love the roll tank I idea. I believe someone on this list has one. It seems a bit to good to be true, otherwise we'd see them all over the place. Simple is good.
Re John Marshall's note about The Flanders on N46 Egret
- Only 3% of the time (86 days) have they been more than a day's run from a safe port.
- Only 9 partial days of really nasty seas (.003%) when they couldn't take shelter. Four of those days were by choice (working to a schedule and ignoring the forecast) and five days not by choice.
- None of those nasty days even approached survival conditions.
Does this say to anyone else that we overweight the actual risk of some of these occurrences and the time and $ spent on on hardware solutions to these risks could be better spent?
RE >> . . . that we overweight the actual risk . . . 9 partial days of
really nasty seas . . .
It doesn't suggest to me that we overweight the risks of sinking !! For
example, I don't like the idea of using a life raft in heavy seas, I only
carry one because it is slightly better than nothing.
John Harris
World Odd @ Sea
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 5.6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 442 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
The Professional version does not have this message
But I think the point is that a boat designed principally for survival
in worst-case situations might be too much of a compromise. All of the
major manufacturers have essentially decided that, given that none of
their boats are remotely as capable as we've envisioned on this list.
But, those boats are out there going all over the place and they don't
get lost in storms and sink, otherwise we'd hear about it.
Unlike sailors, who are always looking to find the wind, and often
find more than their rig can handle.
You obviously have to have a pretty capable boat, and the best of
modern weather forecasting (private weather routers) and absolute
travel discipline relative to weather, and be willing to endure some
hellish days from time to time when you get it wrong. But the better
of the production trawlers can get you through most things, albeit not
very comfortably and perhaps you have to alter course for a day or two
to ride it out. (Which means you need more than 3000 nautical range...
more like 3500 to 4000 at reduced speeds).
But if that's only 5 days out of 2600 as the Egret crew has
experienced (I've read similar comments from others), then I'll go for
comfort and lots of living space to enjoy the other 2595 days.
John
On Nov 9, 2008, at 8:52 AM, John Harris wrote:
RE >> . . . that we overweight the actual risk . . . 9 partial days of
really nasty seas . . .
It doesn't suggest to me that we overweight the risks of sinking !!
For
example, I don't like the idea of using a life raft in heavy seas, I
only
carry one because it is slightly better than nothing.
John Harris
World Odd @ Sea
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 5.6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 442 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
The Professional version does not have this message
http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/passagemaking-under-power
To unsubscribe send email to
passagemaking-under-power-request@lists.samurai.com with the word
UNSUBSCRIBE and nothing else in the subject or body of the message.
Passagemaking Under Power and PUP are trademarks of Water World
Productions, formerly known as Trawler World Productions.
Long and skinny is good. A long and narrow Swede 55 sloop was moored next to
me in Annapolis for the Bermuda Race. The race that year was very rough and
she won. All agree that she would not have won had it not been so rough. She
sliced through the waves while others pounded. That's the way Dashew designs
his boats. BTW, my boathook also won the Bermuda race and I am still waiting
for its return.
Idlewild was purpose built for long range voyaging and has a high asking
price. She lacks creature comforts and is powered for the task and no more.
She probably has over-strength scantlings. Her qualities are not valued by
most buyers and most voyagers want more want more comfortable surrounding
similar to what the Diesel Ducks deliver. The Diesel Duck prices have
climbed to near $500,000 FOB China. If you don't want to sail away, it will
cost you another $100,000 delivered to Seattle or a port in Florida
inclusive of commissioning.
Dave and Nancy Cooper have a Roughwater 56' with a naval architect designed
roll tank on their flybridge. Dave says it works perfectly both underweigh
and at anchor. Properly designed simple is best. I would have both a roll
tank and active stabilizers because the new more intelligent stabilizers can
handle fore and aft pitching as well as rolling. My old, dumb Naiad 252's
need to be centered and locked going into a 5 or 6 foot sea. The natural
buoyancy of the Willard 40 design ensures that no water comes on deck (with
34 knots of wind.) My Willard's narrow fore and aft passageway is not what
the Admiral usually looks for unless she has been in a serious seaway. BTW,
my 1985 W40 FBS with a less efficient Perkins 6.534 gets 2.5 gph at 7.5
knots with the 8KW Onan powering the A/C units. If I back off to 7 knots and
turn off the generator, I imagine this full-displacement hull could get
Patrick's 1.5 gph. When diesel was at $4.00 I was thinking of 6 knots.
Ron Rogers
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark
--- On Sat, 11/8/08, Georgs Kolesnikovs
By the by, Idlewild is still for sale --
Having never been on the boat, I can't hazard a guess as to why she hasn't
sold. I would caution about making conclusions about particular design
elements from one boat. In addition to the long skinny attribute, and the
basic systems attribute, the design for portage forced some trade offs, from
the photos it also appears to have few creature comforts, and perhaps a bit
high priced for what it is.
Re stablization, I love the roll tank I idea. I believe someone on this
list has one. It seems a bit to good to be true, otherwise we'd see them
all over the place. Simple is good.
The newer active fins (I've got the latest Trac 250's, and they are on
the oversized side) can handle wave action from any angle, but of
course they can't reduce pitching as they are mounted on the pitch
centerline. But rolls greater than 10 degrees in most any kind of sea
are a rarity.
By the way, on that N40 that we're talking about, on the Nordhavn
Atlantic Rally heading into the Azores, the story I heard was that the
crew had become so accustomed to stabilization that when they lost it,
they felt as if they couldn't maintain the desired course and didn't
have the fuel to run on a comfortable course until things settled
down. The N40 was fuel challenged for that leg, and I suspect they'd
traveled a little faster than they should have because all their
fellow boats were bigger and faster and had longer legs. Even if they
had been able to run off, all the other boats would have to as well,
given the rule was to stay together. A very special set of conditions.
What I learned from that is that you have to get used to your boat in
a decently large seaway with stabilizers off so you don't freak when
they (ultimately) die. Boats don't capsize because of broken
stabilizers, but an unprepared crew could become fatigued and even
disabled.
Seasickness + anxiety + stuff flying around the boat + physical
fatigue from holding on = ineffective crew.
If you are prepared, both yourself and the boat, and you are
experienced in living in a heavily rolling boat for a period of time,
then you can knock out anxiety and stuff flying around and even be set
up to stay secured and physically relaxed. But I've been on stabilized
boats with stuff piled up such that a single heavy roll is going to
make a hell of a mess. Stabilizers lull you into some bad habits,
especially as the systems become more capable and more reliable.
Also, little boats traveling in the company of more capable boats on
long passages are likely to find themselves doing things they wouldn't
do if they were all alone on the big blue sea. Like maybe going a bit
fast and pushing their fuel reserve lower than they would alone.
I figure you have to be able to run off from the weather or change
course for a few days on a passage and still have the range to make
it. That means reserves should be in the 20% range, not 10%.
John Marshall
Serendipity - Nordhavn 55
Sequim Bay, WA
On Nov 9, 2008, at 10:37 AM, Ron Rogers wrote:
Long and skinny is good. A long and narrow Swede 55 sloop was moored
next to
me in Annapolis for the Bermuda Race. The race that year was very
rough and
she won. All agree that she would not have won had it not been so
rough. She
sliced through the waves while others pounded. That's the way Dashew
designs
his boats. BTW, my boathook also won the Bermuda race and I am still
waiting
for its return.
Idlewild was purpose built for long range voyaging and has a high
asking
price. She lacks creature comforts and is powered for the task and
no more.
She probably has over-strength scantlings. Her qualities are not
valued by
most buyers and most voyagers want more want more comfortable
surrounding
similar to what the Diesel Ducks deliver. The Diesel Duck prices have
climbed to near $500,000 FOB China. If you don't want to sail away,
it will
cost you another $100,000 delivered to Seattle or a port in Florida
inclusive of commissioning.
Dave and Nancy Cooper have a Roughwater 56' with a naval architect
designed
roll tank on their flybridge. Dave says it works perfectly both
underweigh
and at anchor. Properly designed simple is best. I would have both a
roll
tank and active stabilizers because the new more intelligent
stabilizers can
handle fore and aft pitching as well as rolling. My old, dumb Naiad
252's
need to be centered and locked going into a 5 or 6 foot sea. The
natural
buoyancy of the Willard 40 design ensures that no water comes on
deck (with
34 knots of wind.) My Willard's narrow fore and aft passageway is
not what
the Admiral usually looks for unless she has been in a serious
seaway. BTW,
my 1985 W40 FBS with a less efficient Perkins 6.534 gets 2.5 gph at
7.5
knots with the 8KW Onan powering the A/C units. If I back off to 7
knots and
turn off the generator, I imagine this full-displacement hull could
get
Patrick's 1.5 gph. When diesel was at $4.00 I was thinking of 6 knots.
Ron Rogers
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark
--- On Sat, 11/8/08, Georgs Kolesnikovs
By the by, Idlewild is still for sale --
Having never been on the boat, I can't hazard a guess as to why she
hasn't
sold. I would caution about making conclusions about particular
design
elements from one boat. In addition to the long skinny attribute,
and the
basic systems attribute, the design for portage forced some trade
offs, from
the photos it also appears to have few creature comforts, and
perhaps a bit
high priced for what it is.
Re stablization, I love the roll tank I idea. I believe someone on
this
list has one. It seems a bit to good to be true, otherwise we'd see
them
all over the place. Simple is good.
http://lists.samurai.com/mailman/listinfo/passagemaking-under-power
To unsubscribe send email to
passagemaking-under-power-request@lists.samurai.com with the word
UNSUBSCRIBE and nothing else in the subject or body of the message.
Passagemaking Under Power and PUP are trademarks of Water World
Productions, formerly known as Trawler World Productions.
I should have been more clear. My 1985 Naiad 252 active stabilizers turned
my Willard 40 into a submarine when punching into head seas. In this regard
they are dumb and we were taking dollops of green water as high as the
flybridge. At the suggestion of my friend (a pilot among other things) we
locked them in centered position and reduced the boarding water to the
occasional spray. I assume that new Naiads and their competitors now know
enough not to act as submarine dive planes and lock themselves up
automagically - rate sensors are cheap now.
For us slow boaters, the fin area must be proportionately larger than
normally recommended to compensate for the weaker forces generated by
passing through the medium more slowly. As I understand it, new stabilizer
systems allow you to adjust for sensitivity and corresponding frequency of
compensation. I have always wondered if the NAR stabilizer failures were due
to the owners running them at too high a setting for an extended voyage. Of
course, this would require that the manufacturers admit that their products
(in those sizes) are not made for high settings in continuous duty. It is my
vague recollection that the components that failed were mostly sensors and
not the actual hydraulic systems.
Ron Rogers
-----Original Message-----
From: John Marshall
The newer active fins (I've got the latest Trac 250's, and they are on
the oversized side) can handle wave action from any angle, but of
course they can't reduce pitching as they are mounted on the pitch
centerline. But rolls greater than 10 degrees in most any kind of sea
are a rarity.
Re: NAR failures on stabilizers
It is my recollection that many of the Naiad failures on the NAR were due to
pumps, hoses, and broken pins and links not sensors.
Several boats upgraded there pumps during or after the crossing.
I am speaking second hand but I was at ever port along with the Naiad users,
but we had paravanes. - zero failures and never overheated.
For those who want to do ocean passages without stabilizers, I would be
concerned about obtaining competent crew - and don't call me for the
crossing.
John Harris
World Odd @ Sea
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 5.6 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 442 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
The Professional version does not have this message