Last weekend I posted comments re shorthanded offshore racing, and stated I'd have to wait until I had a proper vessel to go offshore. Cap'n Smollet asked what design features (shortcomings) of the Columbia Challenger did I think make it unsuitable for offshore sailing. My initial response listed a couple of features, and a second response listed a couple more. But then, I started to seriously think about the boat, and I decided to submit my thoughts here for comments and suggestions.
I wasn't quite sure where to post this, so I'm putting it here and trust it won't be lost.
My initial reaction to the question resulted in a very short list, but the more I thought about my boat the longer the list became. However, the list is still relatively short and that resulted in my asking myself, "Can I outfit Prelude for safe, reliable, and confident offshore sailing?" Specifically, I want to figure out if I can prepare Prelude for the 2009 SSS racing season, particularly the offshore events.
Here is my list of design shortcomings of the Columbia Challenger, which I believe detract from its potential as an offshore vessel:
Large Cockpit (no obvious solution)
Large companionway
Large/wide hatch opening
Low Bridge Deck (no obvious solution, reducing size of the companionway will help)
Large Ports
Ports installed with automotive glass gasket
No Sea-hood
Flush Deck: (Big Step up/down to/from the flush deck; Limits the possibilities and effectiveness for a dodger) (no obvious solution)
Am I being too cautious, or do these shortcomings really make a boat less suitable (or perhaps unsuitable) for offshore sailing? Can enough of these shortcomings be effectively remedied to make the boat better suited for going offshore? Is any one of these shortcomings a "fatal flaw" rendering the boat unequivocally unsafe for offshore work?
This list is limited to "design features" of the Columbia Challenger. I'm working on a separate list of remedies, repairs, and upgrades.
Any thoughts, comments, suggestions, and ideas would be appreciated.
Thanks.
I'm going to offer a philosophical answer rather than address the specifics of YOUR issues with YOUR boat.
My answer is that everything aboard a boat is a trade-off and there is no ELIMINATION of risk. That said, we try to minimize the risks where possible (and keeping in mind the doing thing A to minimize risk C might actually increase risk D) and stack the deck more into our favor.
Your list contains a number of the 'standard' things against taking a boat offshore. Boats with those design characteristics (or worse) have been taken offshore (perhaps unwisely) and made successful passages. Any ONE could possibly be overlooked, or better stated, made compromise with. But the bottom line is that this list of "shortcomings" gives YOU pause to take this boat offshore. That's the real kicker, and something not to take lightly.
Agree. Laura and I were talking about this yesterday. We did a lot of things to Necessity to make her a safer"big water" boat. Bridge deck , better ports, less cockpit space, fixed keel.
But she would still never be the offshore boat Tehani is capable of being. The boat jusut didn't have the design parameters for it.
We've done a lot of mods to Tehani to improve her too. Primarily in the reduction of the companionway size and adding the seahood, but other smaller things too. We are comfortable taking her offshore. I wouldn't want to sail out into a winter storm, but she'd probably take care of us.
Just the difference in two boats. I have to agree your boat isn't there. No sense in putting the effort into it either, since you KNOW it isn't there. Enjoy her for what she is, and keep looking for a real offshore capable boat, if that's what you want. You HAVE to trust the boat .
Cause it's a "whole other world, once you clear the jetties"
;D
I think, after reading all these posts that THEE most important factor in this discussion is CONFIDENCE in your boat. When you are 'blue water'...ya gotta have faith in your vessel. If, for whatever reason ya don't...it simply will not be fun!! If ya do happen into rough weather and you don't trust what you're sitting in...it WILL be a nightmare. My humble advice....look for a design you trust...there are MANY oldies out there that are VERY capable.....and not too much $$ to boot!!!
You could spend 1000 man-hours hacking up the boat.
Then you'll have a boat much less comfortable for the type of sailing you do the vast majority of the time.
Another thing that is very important is the skills of the sailor... in terms of sailing the boat, and in knowing the boat's capabilities and systems, and knowing the weather and how to plan around it and for it—given the boat's limitations and capabilities.
Ken, who was just rescued from off the Chilean coast, had a rather large boat...but it doesn't sound like it was a very seaworthy boat in some respects... and much of the problem may have been due to a lack of confidence and knowledge about the boat and its capabilities. Part of the problem is that it doesn't look like he was able to plan for the weather, in an area known for serious weather.
I think that modifying a boat for bluewater is possible...but sometimes not the wisest way to go.
A large cockpit can be dealt with by filling in some of the volume of the cockpit with lockers or or floatation, to reduce the volume of water it can hold. A possible idea would be to glass in a locker at the front of the cockpit that would become a bridgedeck, level with or slightly higher than the cockpit benches.
The large ports can be dealt with by either reinforcing the glazing material and adding a cross member internally, to reduce the effective span, or by building storm covers for them.
If you have any specific questions or projects that you want ideas on, let me know.
I've been helping a friend look for a boat that he wants to eventually take off shore.
I use the sailing calculator that i think has been posted here before
http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html
One of my criteria for an offshore boat is a capsize number below 2.0. The columbia challenger is 2.05.
Oded Kishony
Quote from: oded kishony on January 11, 2007, 01:59:12 PM
I've been helping a friend look for a boat that he wants to eventually take off shore.
I use the sailing calculator that i think has been posted here before
http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html
One of my criteria for an offshore boat is a capsize number below 2.0. The columbia challenger is 2.05.
Oded Kishony
I love playing with that little calculator. Just ran my current front-runner for "boat to look for" (Alberg 30) against a Beneteau 305. Whew. We could title that one "What
SAIL magazine does NOT want you to see."
Beneteau is lighter, wider and has more sail area. With a bit more theoretical hull speed and higher SA/D, she's a bit faster. BUT....BUT... she has a capsize ratio of 2.14 and motion comfort ratio of only 18.6 (compared to the Alberg's 31.67).
Also instructive is to look at the performance degradation of the 30ft Hunter's over time. There are three Hunter 30 ft-ers in the database. The Hunter 30, tagged "early" in the list, has 'acceptable' numbers. The H 30-2 much less so (marginal CR and way low MCR). The H 306 much worse (and worse than the Beneteau). Wow.
Maybe that's why the rags say you cannot go offshore with a 30 ft (or smaller) boat...for the ones they advertise, that's probably good advice.
Yes, modern consumer monohulll design has sadly gone towards the market, where the boat is a floating condo, rather than a sailing vessel. The sails are for looks more than anything else for many people who can afford to buy them.
The fact that the modern sailing press has ignored that ocean passages were done regularly in boats smaller than the 40'+ sailing wonders that they tend to promote is very sad...but they have to go for where the money is.
I'd like to thank everyone for their comments, which really made me realize confidence in one's boat is one of, if not the single most important factor in going offshore.
Prelude is a good boat, but it is not a blue-water cruiser. The modifications needed to make it more of a blue-water cruiser would take more time, effort, and money than I'm willing to put into her - with no assurances I'd be any more confident with her offshore.
I will continue to day-sail, cruise the Delta, and participate in the Singlehanded Sailing Society's Bay events while I look for a boat more suitable for offshore sailing.
Thank you all again.
Bob:
Seems that you hit the brick wall of reality following a cost/benefit calculation. Go sailing, you'll feel better. Wasn't there some vapid 60s song lyric, "love the one you're with?" A better bit of advice when applied to sailboats than...
Do write about your single handed sailing adventures in SF. I sailed with Jonathan of Punk Dolphin on a couple of occasions (not in the US). He related stories about how coool that group of sailors is and how much fun singlehanded and double handed racing is out there. Write on!
Final thought: You'd be amazed in what people voyage aboard.
I gather we are adaptable creatures. It will be fun to hear more on that topic from the crop of voyagers presently enroute to a rendezvous in Abaco.
Best to all,
Norman
Cold as the dickens in Boston
Hello All:
Carl's Sail Calculator is a fine help. Elizabeth and I are busy transfering data from it to our own spread sheet.
Other resources we use my be of interest to the group.
PHRF New England posts a list of many boats and their base handicaps. PHRF numbers are useful comparisons between similar vessels regarding boat speed. From a voyagers perspective, they illuminate light air potential. Higher numbers suggest lower light air potential. For all the time I've spent in storms... it is the calms that really make the trip lousy.
A very short list to demonstrate:
Boat PHRF
Triton 255
Alberg 30 228
Alberg 35 201
Catalina 30 180
Albin Ballad 186
Albin Vega 246
Olson 30 108
In theory: For a 1000 nm voyage, PHRF predicts that the Triton will finish 7.5 hours behind an Alberg 30. (255-228=27x1000nm etc.) Both boats would complete the journey about a day and a half behind an Olson 30. (The Olson crew will be happier about that than the Triton/Alberg crews to be sure!)
PHRF NE: http://www.phrfne.org/page/567
Mauri Pro Sailing has a section for "sailboat specifics" and a sub category called "rig dimensions." It is super to be able to look up the I, J, P, and E for all different brands of boats.
Mauri: http://mauriprosailing.com/sailboat-rig-dimensions.htm
Repeating Carl's information.
Carl's: http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html
Elizabeth (aka cubemonkey) has another calculation called the "pitter-pat factor." The pitter-pat factor trumps all others, I observe....
There are no published tables, to my knowledge.
Shall we start one?
Best to all,
Norm
Norm-
Do you have any defining characteristics of the all important pitter-pat factor?? I believe it is a qualitative rating, rather than a quantitative rating, and as such is relatively difficult to measure accurately.
Dan
That is sort of the point. We can look at all the numbers and then mama says something like: "I really love that one." Who am I to argue? Why would I argue?
We do like the older designs, gentle overhangs, spring to the sheer, narrow, lowish freeboard, etc.
Did anyone say: "Alberg 30?"
Our short list also includes some designs that break the rule. The Aphrodite 101 and the Frers 33 are on the list but the C&C 29, 30, etc are not. (Nothing against C&Cs, I love my Melissa.)
Best,
Norman
I too like the older designs, but I feel that Rhodes did much prettier sheer lines than Alberg did. I like the slightly "springier" look to the Rhodes boats.
For example, comparing our Meridian to an Ariel.
Which again all boils down to that Pitter-pat question.
If you like looking back at her when you are rowing away, then she's pretty ;D
(http://sailfar.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10069/thumb_Tehani-in-mosquito-cove.jpg)
Quote from: Norm on January 20, 2007, 11:59:41 AM
Dan
That is sort of the point. We can look at all the numbers and then mama says something like: "I really love that one." Who am I to argue? Why would I argue?
We do like the older designs, gentle overhangs, spring to the sheer, narrow, lowish freeboard, etc.
Did anyone say: "Alberg 30?"
Our short list also includes some designs that break the rule. The Aphrodite 101 and the Frers 33 are on the list but the C&C 29, 30, etc are not. (Nothing against C&Cs, I love my Melissa.)
Best,
Norman
LOL.... Smart man... keep mama happy, everyone stays happy...
I've always been a bit partial to the Alberg 30 myself... beautiful boat... sails well... reasonable size both inside and out and quite seaworthy.
Norm,
That brick wall of reality has always been there. I've never thought of Prelude as a blue-water cruiser. But the SeaFar site, and the community here, has stirred up long held thoughts and ambitions of coastal and ocean cruising. The critical thinking of Prelude's design (prompted by Cap'n Smollet's question) lead to the conclusion that Prelude is not the boat I want to take offshore. I didn't actually pencil out the costs, but the list of projects I feel are necessary to minimally prepare my boat for what I'd like to do is too long to make it practical. I'll be better off finding a different boat.
In the meantime, I'll sail - and love - "the one I'm with." :-)
I will write about my sailing adventures, and share my experiences in the Delta and on the Bay. And I'll be sure to ask my "dumb questions" as I seek out, find, and prepare my next boat.
I liked your use of the PHRF ratings and comparison of various boats. I'm not sure many cruisers use that "racing" information when evaluating boats.
That pitter-pat factor is important, too, ...and not just for the first mate's satisfaction. :-)
Wonder what the PHRF is for a Rhodes Meridian 25?? I surely don't know and have NO idea how to go about finding out.
Just curious ya know.
Charlie,
The Yacht Racing Association of San Francisco lists a "Meridian 25 (Seafarer)," and shows the PHRF rating as 252.
http://www.yra.org/PHRF/docs/ncphrf_baserates.pdf
Quote from: Norm on January 20, 2007, 11:59:41 AM
We do like the older designs, gentle overhangs, spring to the sheer, narrow, lowish freeboard, etc.
Did anyone say: "Alberg 30?"
Uh, well, yes. We looked at one today, and are in agreement about making an offer to buy it! I have a couple of more questions for the owner first, but unless something bizarre happens, we will make that offer.
Thanks- that puts us right between a Triton and an Alberg 30. Not shabby company at all, particularly for a boat with a 17 foot 9 inch waterline ;D
I came across this site while looking at Cape Dory 28's. This fellow is circumnavigating. His website shows many upgrades and modifications he made to the original boat. It struck me as particularly thorough,well thought out and well executed.
http://www.sbastro.com/FeNIX/mainFrameSet.htm
oded kishony
Quote from: oded kishony on February 13, 2007, 02:38:40 PM
I came across this site while looking at Cape Dory 28's. This fellow is circumnavigating. His website shows many upgrades and modifications he made to the original boat. It struck me as particularly thorough,well thought out and well executed.
http://www.sbastro.com/FeNIX/mainFrameSet.htm
oded kishony
Interesting Website. Cheers.
I thought I'd share some information from the results of last weekend's Farallone Islands Race run by the Singlehanded Sailing Society of San Francisco Bay.
The race is about 56 miles long from just off the Golden Gate Yacht Club (about a mile and a half inside the Gate) out to the Farallone Islands and back. 71 boats signed up, 67 boats started, and 65 finished the race. 20 boats 30' or less in length signed up, 2 of which didn't start the race. All 18 that started the race finished.
Here's a list comparing the Motion Comfort Ratios and the Capsize Ratios for those "small boats:"
BOAT LENGTH MCF CSR
Catalina 22 (1) 21'6" 11.86 2.42
Santana 22 (2) 22' 13.08 2.28
Moore 24 (1) 23'8" 10.26 2.25
Dana (1) 23'11" 32.51 1.72
Folkboat (1) 24' 2" 22.37 1.77
Contessa 26 (1) 24'4" 25.33 1.71
Olson 25 (3) 25' 10.65 2.52
Cal 25 (1) 25' 17.89 2.02
Islander 28 (1) 27'10" 20.93 2.05
Express 27 (3) (Data not available)
Santa Cruz 27 (1) 28' 12.5 2.15
Yankee 30 (1) 30' 38.47 1.75
Ericson 30+ (1) 30' 22.58 2.02
Tartan 30 (1) 30' 24.06 1.94
Wilderness 30 (1) (Data not available)
Total of 20 boats 30' and less in a fleet of 71. (28% of the fleet)
Browsing the Race Results Archive on the SSS site is interesting. Small boats with less attractive numbers do sail successfully in ocean races.
I reserve the right to change my mind about preparing Prelude for ocean racing/sailing at anytime for any reason... ;D Seriously, I have given more thought to what I might be able to modify on my boat to improve her seaworthiness for some ocean sailing.
(sorry about the formatting on those columns - I haven't figured out how to get them to line up)
A few years ago, a Nicholson 33 won the Fastnet race in the UK, beating out some very large and impressive boats like the 98' ICAP Maximus.
It seems that a lot of the modern press and sailing world seems to forget that the typical cruising boat, up to just a few years ago, was less than 40' in length, with many below the 30' mark.
Many of the features that make the new "floating condo" boats so appealing in the boat show are the same points that make them dangerous on the open seas—wide, open, airy salons; beamy hulls; and large, spacious cockpits.
That´s soooo true, AdriftatSea. In many aspects the way boat design has gone these last 20 years make me sad.
One advantage, of course, is that price levels on the older, more traditionally designed yachts are getting more and more attractive for a poor guy like me. ;)
One other advantage is that the older, smaller cruising boats are generally less of a target for thieves and such for those sailing in more distant waters.
Hi Bob,
In my opinion (which matters little, and I acknowledge that :) ), the "offshore" design criteria are less important for a 56 mile race. The design shortcomings you see in Prelude center around overall seaworthiness in 'rough' conditions and ultimately being prepared for "the unexpected."
When planning or making an offshore passage, you cannot always predict the weather and conditions you will find. Weather forecasting is good only a couple of days, with SOME reasonably broad predictions okay out to about 1 week. When going on an offshore "passage," you have to be prepared for what you cannot predict when you leave.
But a 56 mile "passage"? You have a pretty good idea what the weather is going to be. You should know, with as much certainty as can be had with the weather in any case, what to expect. In short, you should know if the conditions are within your comfort level on that particular boat.
In my opinion, I would have NO hesitation taking Prelude on a 50 mile offshore 'passage' (race or whatever) in the right weather. That's similar in some ways to a crossing from Florida to the Bahamas, and I'd take my 18 footer on such a trip - with the right weather.
You'll know at the start of the race if the conditions exceed your own level of comfort. This issue with "offshore" seaworthiness is not crossing some arbitrary line on a chart, it is with handling wind and sea. If the wind and sea are within what you and the boat can handle, I'd say by all means go for it.
That's my $0.02.
Quote from: Captain Smollett on April 26, 2007, 08:50:45 AM
Hi Bob,
In my opinion (which matters little, and I acknowledge that :) ), the "offshore" design criteria are less important for a 56 mile race......
I agree John. I will say however, the patch of water he is talking about is a little different.
QuoteThe race is about 56 miles long from just off the Golden Gate Yacht Club (about a mile and a half inside the Gate) out to the Farallone Islands and back.
Having never sailed there, but having spent years watching boats sail there I can say it is a nasty nasty stretch of water.
The Farllons are barely visable on the best of days, and it can be very difficult to know what you are up against if not impossible. The wave heights are phenomenal, and many boats have exceeded the limits of their capabilities there.
I really appreciate the break down Bob posted, it says a lot to counter the sailing rag's notion that you can ot leave the shore with anything less then 40' or wll under you.
Those guys who sail that race are really
nuts brave IMHO.
Quote from: s/v Faith on April 26, 2007, 12:19:34 PM
I agree John. I will say however, the patch of water he is talking about is a little different.
Having never sailed there, but having spent years watching boats sail there I can say it is a nasty nasty stretch of water.
The Farllons are barely visable on the best of days, and it can be very difficult to know what you are up against if not impossible. The wave heights are phenomenal, and many boats have exceeded the limits of their capabilities there.
Fair enough. My only real point was that I thought he generally would KNOW the conditions by the start of the race. If not acceptable (to HIM), no harm in backing out at that point. When Bob first posted about the offshore capabilities (or lack thereof) of his boat, i think we all interpreted that to mean in terms of more "general" offshore use ... that is, beyond that window that conditions can safely be at least guestimated.
Given his "window" of 56 miles (typically less than one full day), I think the equation of "absolutely not" vs. "okay, maybe" shifts a little bit. Perhaps not by much.
"My only real point was that he generally would KNOW the conditions by the start of the race. " Or, are you saying that in that location you CANNOT know the conditions by the start of the race? If that area (been there once, not sailing) is truly that unpredictable, then of course, I wholeheartedly agree - I'm all for erring on the side of prudence.
If nothing else, this discussion I think helps emphasize (for me least) there are NO absolute statements when it comes to boats, sailing and sailors. And yes, I am aware of the irony of that statement. ;)
Interesting. Then what is it that makes the SF Bay that bad? I think I can recall that fog is common, but apart from that. Is the depth decreasing rapidly and thus making th wave pattern nasty?
yes, I am a curious kind of guy ;) I always want to KNOW
Quote"My only real point was that he generally would KNOW the conditions by the start of the race. "
Yes, I agree with that... mostly.
There are some really great resources to help identify what is going on there.
http://sfports.wr.usgs.gov/cgi-bin/wind/windbin.cgi?x=135&y=288
Check this one (http://sfports.wr.usgs.gov/wind/streaklines.shtml)out.
I am looking for one of the coolest tidal flow tools I have ever seen.... (I'll find it).
It is not that it is unknowable, just that it is VERY hard to perdict.
The stretch of ocean that race sails through, is the narrow pass (very deep) where nearly all the water flow coming from northern (and central) California flows to the ocean.
There is a scale model of the Bay in an exhibit near the maritime museum in San Fransisco. The demonstrations there are truly amazing.
The stories of boats lost there on seemingly calm days are legion.
I do not pretend to be an expert on sailing the bay, I lived there summers growing up and I am originally from there. I think I have sailed there once, as a kid. I have watched sailboats there for years, and dream of sailing there myself.
I am sure Zen will have more knowledge then I, but yes, I do believe it is a fairly unique situation.
I can imagine that it can be really bad there, especially in the narrow channel w. a strong westerly.
I did not know that,thought it to be more of an an open bay
John,
I agree that a day-sail of 56 miles is not the same as a long distance passage, but I wasn't trying to suggest it is. It is true that the weather for the day of that race is pretty well known by the time the race begins, and each skipper makes the go/no go decision. Graig is right, though. The Potato Patch, just outside the Golden Gate can be very nasty and dangerous. The conditions on the Patch can sometimes be determined by asking the pilot on an inbound vessel. Some of those guys are sailors themselves and will describe the conditions they observe.
My original thrust in this thread did concern longer term ocean sailing than a day race. I would like to participate in what is called the Long Pac Race: 200 miles out the Gate and return. I asked for input about preparing my current boat, listed what I think are design features needing attention, and concluded I needed to shop for a boat more suitable for ocean sailing.
Since that conclusion in January, I've done quite a bit of thinking about where I am in life, where Karen and I are going, realizing Karen does not share my sailing ambitions, and reading more about small boat sailing. I could spend a lump sum purchasing another boat - and have a different boat to upgrade and outfit. Or, I can keep Prelude, outfit her for what I want to do, and have a decent little boat. I am leaning toward outfitting Prelude.
I think the reason I posted the info about the small boats in the race was to show that boats with less than ideal MCR and CSR numbers are sailed out on the ocean. Maybe it was the realization upon seeing those numbers that the numbers are "more like guidelines than rules." I will research the SSS archives for Long Pac and Transpac results to see what types of small boats have participated in those events over the years. Yes, I understand that it doesn't really matter what anyone else has done in any size boat - what matters is that I am comfortable with in my boat and myself.
I'd like to thank the Sail Far community for making me think and helping me see things in a different light.
Quote from: BobW on April 27, 2007, 12:31:13 AM
I will research the SSS archives for Long Pac and Transpac results to see what types of small boats have participated in those events over the years. Yes, I understand that it doesn't really matter what anyone else has done in any size boat - what matters is that I am comfortable with in my boat and myself.
BobW,
IMHO I think that sums it all up. Not just for you, but for all of us. As an example I decided to change to my current boat a couple of years ago, solely for convenience. My old boat, a Folkboat, is a well proven blue water cruiser, and I trust that boat completely, but simply said, I doubt I could keep my sanity crawling around that cabin for a 3 week passage... still prefer it to a modern 'floating condo' though. ;)
just my 2 cents
My understanding is that the farllons are where you will find the greatest consentration of Great White Sharks in the worlds other then a certain spot in Australia. So if you have your boat sink out from under you and are bobbing about in your lifevest..... Your adventure has just begun, Chum.
Alex.
;D
I thought a spot off of south africa, where they actual run tour boats out to see the jumping great whites was second.
Yuk! :'( :P :-\
I checked thestats again... South coast of Australia form Freemantle to the Ayre Pennisula (This is a HUGE area of water, by the way), then the Farllons,I think it a samplng based on individuals/hours per day/per sq. Km.
I have seen he pics from Sth Africa, and while they are certainly impressive, it is possible that about 20 sharks have just staked that as their territory and ceased migrating. I was in a boat off the coast of Freemantle about 6 years ago when a dead whale washed into the bay on the tide. We were about 250meters away and I swear I coud have walked from our boat to the whale on the backs of Great whites milling and maneuvering around to get their chomp.
I was not temotely qualified to come up with a guestimate of how many thee were in the water that day...But if someone had said 1200 I would have had no trouble believing it.... wold have accepted 3000 as atop end number that seemed realistic, based on the assumption they were around the other side of the whale as much as ours...there were a whole heck of a lot of sharks.
We unanimously made the wise desicion that the fishing was going to be a little crappy that day and quietly exited stage left in our wonderfully high-freeboard shark-cat boat. Radioed the hire company to explain what was going on and asked if we ere ellegible for a refund if we brought the boat back straight away, were told no...and so spent the afternoon in a huge freemantle fishing charter boat...moored upa small esturine creek, fishing for flathead. It had the quality of being surreal about it.
Alex.
High freeboard is a good thing sometimes..but rarely on a sailboat.
Quote from: Fortis on April 27, 2007, 04:09:36 AM
My understanding is that the farllons are where you will find the greatest consentration of Great White Sharks in the worlds other then a certain spot in Australia. So if you have your boat sink out from under you and are bobbing about in your lifevest..... Your adventure has just begun, Chum.
Or just met it's final Yee Haw. :) :o :o :o :-[