Design Features and Offshore Sailing

[BobW]

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.

[Captain Smollett]

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.

[CharlieJ]

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

[Frank]

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!!!

[Cmdr Pete]

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.

[AdriftAtSea]

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.

[oded kishony]

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

[Captain Smollett]

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.

[AdriftAtSea]

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.

[BobW]

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.

[Norm]

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

[Norm]

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

[AdriftAtSea]

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.

[Norm]

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

[CharlieJ]

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

[AdriftAtSea]

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. 

[BobW]

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.  :-)

[CharlieJ]

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.

[BobW]

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

[Captain Smollett]

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.