Sailing Philosophy

[Captain Smollett]

I know we have discussed this in the past, but the "cost of engine" discussion has gotten me to thinking about "personal philosophy" again.

I think one way to 'categorize' boaters in general and sailors in particular is on a scale of "fighting against or working with nature."  Like many such classifications, I see it as a spectrum with a lot of 'gray area' between the two extremes.

On one end lie the folks that pick a departure date and stick to it, no matter what wind and tide is doing (unless it is 'extreme').  They motor into the wind because the line is shorter and more direct.  They fire up the engine when boat speed falls some predetermined value under optimum cruising speed.

For this extreme, the destination is what matters and how one gets there is immaterial.

At the other end lie the sailors that work with tide, sail in light air (and heavy) with less eye on boat speed and "ease/comfort" and don't think of destinations as "targets" so much as points that define direction.

This mode can be described by the attitude "with a sail boat, you are already there."

One's position in this spectrum in part defines how many boating decisions are made.  The decision to heave-to might allow the boat to drift in the 'wrong' direction, but deploying a sea anchor from the bow can damage the boat and lead to uncomfortable ride.

I recall the poignant story of a couple in the South Pacific that got caught in a storm that exemplified this very, very nicely.  They put the sea anchor from the bow and were miserable...the boat was crashing into seas and the overall ride was described as uncomfortable. Sometime during the storm, a line chafed through and the boat adopted a "natural" attitude to the seas and they described the ride as remarkably different and better.

So, why then did they "undo" that better ride and return to a bow-on attitude to the seas?  That's a question I've often wondered in the 15 years or so since I read that account.

One possible answer (and I don't presume to speak for that crew, I'm just making a point) is that 'bow on' kept them pointed in the direction of their destination (New Zealand).  Allowing the boat to 'drift' put them away from their destination and back toward where they had already sailed.

"Give the boat what she wants" sounds easy, is advocated in publications such as Chapman's and DOES work...but why do we so often ignore it?  Reefing by the numbers, deploying the pet storm tactic du jour, motoring without ANY sail up, etc...what drives us to "fight" against not only the nature of the wind and waves, but the design of the boat herself?

For me, sailing is as much a spiritual, contemplative time as it is a means of propulsion.  I get that not everyone sees it that way.  Still, it does lead me to wonder about "Costs" incurred during the "fight" versus "Benefits" gained in going with the flow...the flow of tide, of wind, and natural ride of the boat we've chosen.

One last example:

A boat in a slip with floating docks can be an unhappy beast.  Waves hit the boat and the dock just enough out of phase to cause problems.

While docked at Bridge Pointe Marina, I noticed a number of boaters try to 'secure' their boat in the slip; the boat was 'made fast' and tight to the docks.  Movement of the boat seemed to ben an enemy to be conquered. Often, I'd see these same folks ashore during more bouncy times and they would say things like "The movement was just too much....had to get off a while."

I noticed that for our boat, things were MUCH more comfortable when the dock lines were "loose" and the boat was "allowed" to ride through her natural periods of motion (which can be VERY complex).  She bobbed and weaved in the slip, but we hardly noticed below.  Lines were more gently tensioned and peacefully tugged her back into position.

I could always tell when a line was too tight; she'd jerk, and pull, and quite literally...scream...in discomfort.  My instinct was to loosen such lines to allow the boat to find her own way better, but I did notice lots of folks tightened in that circumstance.  I don't know the results of their actions, but I do know the results of mine.

[Godot]

My best guess is that reality has a habit of messing with philosophy.

Sure, a lot of folks don't want to bob around or spend extra hours at sea and fire up the motor. I'm cool with that. Boating (I'll refrain from calling it "sailing" for the moment) should be enjoyed, not endured. For lots of sailors the boat is a part time hobby, a place to spend family time, or perhaps a way to pick up chicks, and not an issue of philosophical importance. 

I suspect there are a great number of folks out there that would love to play the wind/tide/current, will happily heave to if necessary, and just enjoy being out on the water no matter what the conditions (me me me). If I don't miss my guess, most of these folks find themselves subjected to the reality of getting home in time to get to work (me...I almost didn't make it this weekend after my motor broke, again, and finally made it into my slip barely in time to start answering phone calls Monday morning), or are sailing with those they love that are less enamored with the romance of sailing and are frustrated with not going anywhere fast (with the ex-wife this was an issue...much less of an issue with the current lovely). If your mate is unhappy, odds are, you are unhappy.

Perhaps this was easier back in the day when motors were less common, and getting stuck out or being forced to divert to a new destination was just considered an inevitable part of the sailing life. I think it is easier to accept the inevitable. Harder when there is the choice of firing up the motor.

As to the folks tying up to the floating dock...I doubt that is a philosophic choice; but more likely one made of ignorance. I don't have much experience with floating docks but didn't expect that to be a problem. I could easily make the same mistake myself. Who knew? It's something I'll now keep in mind should I ever find myself in that situation.

A similar thing with the couple lying to a sea anchor. My guess is that they didn't have a lot of experience in heavy weather and did what they thought they were supposed to do. Throw in exhaustion and fear and I doubt they even considered alternative solutions. Using the Pardey method of heaving to with the sea anchor may have made their lives easier. Who knows? I do know that stressful situations can generate a mental tunnel vision. Been there. About the only way to deal with it that I have learned is to hold on tight and when it is over do something of an after action report to determine how better to handle a similar situation next time. It seems unlikely to me that they were actually concerned with what direction the boat was pointing. Not so much philosophy as experience here as well. They may very well do better next time.

[Jim_ME]

This discussion reminds me of the quote...

"We see things not as they are, but as we are."

I see some of this philosophy as a way to look at experiences or reality, often after the fact, as a way to interpret them and to give them meaning in some kind of broad sense...so do also see how some could see it as part of a spiritual process.

Whether one is obligated to work on a conventional schedule does seem to be a major influence on the way that one can approach sailing and cruising. What a difference it is to set off for an evening sail knowing that you have to start work at a certain time the next day--and that you (ideally) need a decent night's sleep before that. [I guess many get a good taste of this on weekends]

Contrast that to, say Charlie, who is retired, or Craig during his months in the Bahamas, or James & Rachel, and others who, after building up the cruising kitty, are truly free to set their own schedule and cruise the way that they want to. Free to wake up in the morning and know that you can just do whatever you feel like doing that day (within budget constraints).

[to attribute the quote..."We don't see things as they are, we see them as we are." ― Anais Nin]

[Godot]

And even assuming the cruising kitty is built up, work is left, and a person is totally free, I imagine it is a real challenge to leave shore side habits aside. We are all in just such a darn hurry!

I hear people claim that they don't want to "camp" when sailing, which I assume generally means they intend on keeping their shore-side conveniences and lifestyle. Big galleys, showers (and the watermakers to feed them), entertainment centers, separate "staterooms," etc... With all that how difficult it must be to change from shore-side thought processes! I suspect that folks who visit this site would generally not fall into that trap. Small boats have certain limitations regards powered range, electrical and water generation, stowage, and typically are simpler over all. I suspect a smaller, simpler boat does a pretty good job of encouraging a change in mindset.

Edit: Spell check is a wonderful thing....

[Captain Smollett]

I suspect a smaller, simpler boat does a pretty good job of encouraging a change in mindset.

There's a chicken-egg question, here though.

Do we seek smaller, simpler boats because we already have the 'changed mindset' and simply don't "fit in" with the faster, busier, more materialistic lifestyle?

Or, do we live in that life and want to make a change and see the smaller boat as the ticket to that change.

Again, I think it is really a spectrum with a lot of in-between.  But still interesting to ponder (while shorebound!).

[Godot]

I suspect a smaller, simpler boat does a pretty good job of encouraging a change in mindset.

There's a chicken-egg question, here though.

Do we seek smaller, simpler boats because we already have the 'changed mindset' and simply don't "fit in" with the faster, busier, more materialistic lifestyle?

Or, do we live in that life and want to make a change and see the smaller boat as the ticket to that change.

I suspect there is a lot of both. Folks who dream of the big boat, can only afford something smaller and simpler and happily adapt. And those that are seeking out a simpler lifestyle.

We all walk our own paths.

[Godot]

If you hadn't already figured, my general philosophy of life is to let people find their own way and not judge their choices. While I despise being told how to live my life, I similarly can't stand the thought of telling someone else how best they can live theirs. Often times folks make a lot of wrong turns before they find their way. God knows I did. But as painful as the trip has sometimes been, I don't think I'd be the person I am if I hadn't made those wrong turns.

I'm perhaps more libertarian than the average person.

[Captain Smollett]

We all walk our own paths.

Indeed.

let people find their own way and not judge their choices.

Agreed 100%.

Sometimes I think when I make observations and try to 'define' trends and patterns it comes across as judging or criticizing.  That's certainly not my intent.

What I do find interesting, though, is the pattern that some choices lead more to peace than others.  The materialistic carrot chase is never satisfied.  Neither is 'big boat itis.'

Too often, we work, we expend our precious time on earth merely to spend and it just all seems so wasteful. In that light, what harm is there voicing "there may be another way."  Not necessarily better for everyone, but a choice perhaps not seen.

When I read so many stories and hear so many folks at the docks and in the clubhouse COMPLAINING about repairs or the cost of cruising...unexpected financial AND spiritual costs, it is enlightening.  I've been told by an older gent that gave up living aboard / cruising before he really started that "it was just harder than I thought it would be."

He was selling his boat.

Giving up because it is "hard" may be a symptom of a larger issue.  For those on the "fight nature" side of the spectrum, costs, weather, tighter or more spartan living conditions are to be 'defeated.'  The mags say so; the conventional wisdom says so.  "You too can cruise in comfort."

Then, there's a fundamental reality...some things cannot be 'beaten.'  You can't change the weather.  A boat is not a house.  When technology cannot "defeat" the problems that arise, or merely costs too much to attain, the person all-too-often is him or herself 'defeated.'

For my part, I think it boils down to "balance."  So much in life seems to come back to that.  Even sailing has as one of the most basic principles balance.  This is one reason why I like Craig's idea of "Reduction of Misery."

So, I guess with that, the missing piece is not..."that guy gave up because he did not cruise like me" but rather "what could he have done to reduce his misery, reduce his cost?"  He worked a long time to BUY the boat, as many often do.  What happened to cause him to give up that dream?

I don't know in his particular case.  But, there are some generalities that we can draw.  Biggish boats require a LOT more $$ to maintain; more gadgets fail, and because of PERCEIVED need, are replaced.  Motor against wind and tide at 2-3x the fuel consumption per mile gained, etc.

Are people "wrong" to do those things?  Of course not.  Is that a "good" recipe for success?  Anecdotal observation says "no."  Unless you just happen to enjoy complaining about what is going wrong, how much more this is costing than you planned, being married to "repairs in exotic locations," etc.

I'll end this chapter with a story.  At the marina, I was friends with a dude that lived on a 46 foot schooner.  We were a family of four living on a 30 footer.  I was always giving him a (good natured) hard time about him having "too much boat."  He teased me right back, I can assure you.

The point of this is that that was the RIGHT boat for him.  He was retired and had several children and thus several batches of grand children.  They came to visit him.  He wanted to have room, to have a place for them to come TO ... to WANT to visit him.  He wanted to have the capacity to take large-ish groups sailing, on cruises.

His boat was NOT set up for single handing; he always had to 'seek crew' when he wanted to go out for a day, a week or several months.  But that cost was worth it to him for the gains, the benefits, he got from that particular vessel.

So, my teasing was, as stated, good natured.  He did not "complain" about the cost of a slip, the deep draft (which around here earned him a less than flattering nickname), the need for crew, the endless painting of steel hull.   He was getting what he "paid" out of his boat.

The contrast is those that don't.