Coastal Cruising Vs Passagemaking, boat capabilities

[caltexflanc]

Thanks Scott, I missed the tween deck reference. Your story about the woman on the sail boat is well taken.

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Yah - some people need to lighten up. On our dock we were really thankful last summer when a Searay showed up. It gave the Bayliner owners somebody to look down on.

But I would have a beer for them!

 

[Marin]

The captain was thrown across the compartment, too, at some point. and was smashed into a table. While he was able to get around afterwards he required assistance. This was in the reports about the sinking prior to the actual investigation articles Charles linked to.

 

[ksanders]

So how does the Bounty a boat that went down in a hurricane have anything with coastal cruising vs passage making ???

Passage makers might be tough boats but hurricanes have long accurate prediction times

 

[Marin]

The point had been made about the advantages and disadvantages of the relatively small interior compartments on passagemakers like Nordhavns. The injuries sustained on the Bounty illustrate the reason behind the use of smaller interior spaces on vessels that are intended to be able to deal with rough seas if while on a long ocean passage they encounter conditions from which they cannot run or are too far out to reach a safe haven in time. It does not require a hurricane to generate sea conditions that can be pretty violent for the occupants of an ocean-crossing boat.

 

[ksanders]

The point had been made about the advantages and disadvantages of the relatively small interior compartments on passagemakers like Nordhavns. The injuries sustained on the Bounty illustrate the reason behind the use of smaller interior spaces on vessels that are intended to be able to deal with rough seas if while on a long ocean passage they encounter conditions from which they cannot run or are too far out to reach a safe haven in time. It does not require a hurricane to generate sea conditions that can be pretty violent for the occupants of an ocean-crossing boat.

OK, thats viable.

I would venture to guess that the type of conditions that the bounty experienced far exceed the conditiones even most passafemakers ever get exposed to.

An unexpected squall or storm while crossing an ocean is one thing. Sustained hurricane force winds are altogether thing another.

 

[Marin]

I would venture to guess that the type of conditions that the bounty experienced far exceed the conditiones even most passafemakers ever get exposed to.

.

Agreed, but with weather and water, never say never. An ocean is an awfully big place at 7 knots or so and even the weather weenies get it wrong from time to time. A thousand miles from shore in the Pacific and if things change unexpectedly, there you are. Not much you can do about it except ride it out, which boats like Nordhavns are designed to do (up to a point).

I have never crossed the ocean in a small boat but I have been out in the middle of the Pacific (in Hawaii) on one many times. And even on a nice day, the big swells with wind waves on top of them, the waves often coming at you from a different angle than the long-range swells, can toss a boat around like you wouldn't believe.

Even among the local sportfishing crowd toes and legs and fingers and arms got broken on a weekly basis, knees got smashed into door frames, people lost their footing or grip on the ladders to the flying bridges and fell into cockpits, and so on. And all this was at medium trolling speeds, maybe seven or eight knots.

The boat (Uniflite) I fished on fell off the top of a wave one day about 30 miles off the north shore of Oahu which also pitched us into the trough between swells. So a vertical drop of maybe fifteen feet, and the hull hit so hard it cracked two stringers and sheared a motor mount. The two of us were up on the flying bridge and we were young and fit so we took the tremendous shock okay. Were that same thing to happen to me today I don't know if my spine could take the sudden compression without damage.

So stuff happens out in the middle of an ocean, even on nice days. Having lots of things to hold onto and short distances to be thrown across if you're going to be can be very beneficial, and companies like Nordhavn know this.

 

[BruceK]

This may demonstrate the versatility of boats, or perhaps ships. Anyone who visited Sydney will have seen the Manly ferries plying the 7 miles between the city and Manly, including crossing the Heads which open to the Pacific. Only in most severe weather are services suspended, TV news footage of progress in heavy weather is exciting .They are typically around 200ft in length, true double enders with prop and helm both ends.
The current ones were built here, but many predecessors were built in the UK and arrived on their own bottom. A good example is the beautiful South Steyne with her unmistakable lines, now a floating restaurant in Darling Harbour. People on passing ships were astounded seeing her transit the Suez canal, in company livery. The only other survivor is the Baragoola, built locally in 1922, currently afloat and hopefully in restoration.
These humble harbour ferries of 230ft,beam 41ft,draft 11ft,2 3200bhp diesels, carry thousands of commuters a day,yet the ferries on which they are based crossed oceans. The South Steyne regularly day cruised off Sydney on weekends, as well as fulfilling commuter duties. They are proven ocean going inshore ferries. The so called "coastal cruiser" has the ability to surprise.

 

[Pau Hana]

This may demonstrate the versatility of boats, or perhaps ships. Anyone who visited Sydney will have seen the Manly ferries plying the 7 miles between the city and Manly, including crossing the Heads which open to the Pacific. Only in most severe weather are services suspended, TV news footage of progress in heavy weather is exciting .They are typically around 200ft in length, true double enders with prop and helm both ends.
The current ones were built here, but many predecessors were built in the UK and arrived on their own bottom. A good example is the beautiful South Steyne with her unmistakable lines, now a floating restaurant in Darling Harbour. People on passing ships were astounded seeing her transit the Suez canal, in company livery. The only other survivor is the Baragoola, built locally in 1922, currently afloat and hopefully in restoration.
These humble harbour ferries of 230ft,beam 41ft,draft 11ft,2 3200bhp diesels, carry thousands of commuters a day,yet the ferries on which they are based crossed oceans. The South Steyne regularly day cruised off Sydney on weekends, as well as fulfilling commuter duties. They are proven ocean going inshore ferries. The so called "coastal cruiser" has the ability to surprise.

Well put, Bruce. Once upon a time, there wasn't such a distinction between passagemaker and coastal cruiser. The coastal cruiser became a passagemaker when the coastal cruiser went on a passage.....

The ability to go long range doesn't have to require a vessel of epic proportions or battleship capabilities. Kevin (ksanders) and I had a great chat yesterday, and agrees that it's just a factor of having time to pick a rough and weather window, along with the ovvious factors of vessel capability.

I believe that there are too many "experts" who haven't done a major ocean crossing (but will offer concrete data on how to do one)- they are the snobs that are manufacturer specific, or will argue that only certain types of vessels can undertake ocean voyages.

I figure we'll just go on our excursions, and send said "experts" a post card or email from a destination the "experts" said we couldn't possibly get to....

 

[caltexflanc]

My coastal cruiser has been in miserable offshore conditions on three occasions (read, from a standing position at the upper helm, the oncoming swell blocked my view of the horizon, among other cruddy sea states) and handled them with aplomb. Nobody ever got hurt, nothing broke. I wasn't at all happy that I put myself and crew and the boat in that situation, but as Marin said, forecasts can be wrong, stuff happens. We are pleasure boaters, in that order, and have become increasingly conservative in adhering to that maxim.

The primary elements that make my boat a coastal cruiser have to do with its design, which simply lacks the range to fully cross oceans. 2,3, 400 mile open water transits in non-storm conditions? No problem. I personally do not enjoy running at night, and so avoid those runs given the choice. We know or have met quite a few guys who captain big sport fishers who will regularly take the boats from Costa Rica to the DR to the Bahamas to Beaufort or Hatteras to Bermuda to Montauk in straight shots, perhaps requiring a fuel bladder in the cockpit to do it. But those boats are purpose built to ocean conditions, that's where they live, which is probably why they act like a bull in a china shop on the rare occasion they have to take the ditch.

You might better say that it is the captain that makes a boat capable of bigger things a coastal cruiser and marina hopper. We've seen plenty of Nordhavns and ocean-capable sail boats who are as much slaves to the magenta line as any Carver or Sea Ray, often with the pristine anchor in the pulpit to match.

 

[sunchaser]

OK, thats viable.

I would venture to guess that the type of conditions that the bounty experienced far exceed the conditiones even most passafemakers ever get exposed to.

.

Today's smart and alert blue water cruisers can avoid bad weather if they so choose - as Steve and Linda Dashew detail in their books "Avoiding the Storm" and "Weather." Wallbridge was neither smart or alert as noted at the moment of his departure by those pros that found shelter for their big vessels.

 

[psneeld]

or little vessels...

 

[twistedtree]

All this talk about people getting injured on board makes me realize how big a risk that is when running with a minimal crew. 90% of the time it's just my wife and me, and if one of us got hurt enough to be out of commission, it would pose a real challenge. Throw in some bad weather, which of course is highly likely to coincide with an injury, and things get really tough. And if you are on a passage or anything longer than 8+ hours, you have one person at the helm for a very long time without rest. I could see things going bad very quickly.

This is something I haven't considered enough in our cruising, and need to plan for better than I have.

What about others? It's not so bad for shortish legs, but for longer legs is seems like a big risk. Perhaps even more of a risk than all the possible equipment failures that we obsess over.

 

[psneeld]

Pretty strong argument supporting autopilots...even on the ICW they can be used quite a bit to help.

Thankfully, in US waters the USCG will help in most emergency cases pretty rapidly.

Then again...depending on the injury/illness, like NAVY SEALs...ya gotta do whatever you can to pll through on your own...

Being on the water is like being in the wilderness...even in populated areas due to limited response capabilities and jurisdictional arguing.

 

[JD]

And even on a nice day, the big swells with wind waves on top of them, the waves often coming at you from a different angle than the long-range swells, can toss a boat around like you wouldn't believe.

Not unlike Lake Erie. Been out there with little or no wind and the swells were three to four foot. Then a small front blows through, winds get up to 15 kts and the tops of the swells turn white. All this can happen within an hour and when you are fifteen miles out you are not getting back in time.

The point is it doesn't take an ocean to have this happen. Pamlico and Albemarle sounds can both whip your butt in a heart beat. Even in a 60' Hatteras.

 

[Codger2]

Not unlike Lake Erie.

I lived in Erie, PA for the first 25 years of my life. I sailed (Star) on that lake with my buddy's father and can attest to its unpredictability. Many have labeled it as the roughest of the Great Lakes, (It's shallow.)

 

[ksanders]

Its funny, but a boater could easily read a thread like this one, (which is typical of internet based ocean boating discussions) and get so scared they never leave the safety of the harbor, or protected waters.

What a shame that would be. What a world they, and others that never venture forth would miss.

I admit that cruising away from the safety of the dock, or the bay poses risks. To some those risks are unacceptable. They are the dreamers. you'll hear them say "if I only had a bigger, or more capable boat I'd go" or "someday I'll have a XXXXX boat and be able to go".

Those people, and yes there are a few here, think guys like me venturing out into the Gulf Of Alaska, or Guys like SCARY taking his 26' Bayliner to Alaska are fools. That we put ourselves and our families at risk.

All I can say is that we're here, we're alive, and we've had a great adventure along the way. There's no wishing for us. Our only limitation is the time to fulfill our dreams.

 

[sunchaser]

90% of the time it's just my wife and me, and if one of us got hurt enough to be out of commission, it would pose a real challenge. .

The risks are real. AIS, good AP, radar alerts turned on, onboard weather streaming via shore based routers, added belt and harness ties and SSB help to round out the necessities.

It is not uncommon for only two only with countless Nordhavn and Dashews logging 10,000 of miles this way. There are some good websites and blogs by owners doing it as two - specifically Nordhavn's and Dashew's.

But 3 or 4 makes more sense for the long blue water trips, there is good free help out there from those who have the creds.

 

[ksanders]

This is what adventure is all about. We all can do this, if we only try.

I just found a post I made on the BOC, in real time on May 02, 2012 02:32AM, during my last Gulf Of Alaska crossing. Please see the post below. My heart is beating faster just reading it. Time to set sail again!

I have to admit, its been a long time since I operated a boat at night.

Imagine this...

You're in a sea that is safe but moves the boat around quite a bit. OK you can imagine that.

Now take away all of your visual references. You cannot see. You do not know when a wave is going to hit. But you learn. You get a feel for the rhythm. You begin to anticipate the next set.

This is a time when you live by your radar and your chart plotter, because this is is really all you have between you and danger. Unimaginable danger. The primal fear danger of not surviving.

Right now this is my world. This is night shift on the MV Lisas Way.

Right now at this particular moment I am very happy that my Furuno Manual looks old and tattered. Why...

Because I've read it. Not once, but many times, over a period of years. I know that equipment. I know that when the radar shows something it really exists. I know that when it shows nothing thats because nothing is out there.

Because when your equipment is all that separates you from the darkest of times, having confidence in that equipment is all that keeps you sane.

Right now I'm in the middle of my 4 hour watch. Jamison is asleep in his bunk, and I am at the helm.

I can see the tip of Kyak Island that we just passed. I can see a couple of shower cells on the radar. Other than that all is quiet on the MV lisas Way.

​

Last edited by ksanders; 05-02-2012 at 02:35 AM.
​

 

[Codger2]

Its funny, but a boater could easily read a thread like this one, (which is typical of internet based ocean boating discussions) and get so scared they never leave the safety of the harbor, or protected waters..

Come on, Kevin!
How is scared of boating any different from fear of flying, sky diving, auto racing, rock climbing, etc.? We all have our private fears (including you!) but that doesn't mean we can't enjoy what boaters, like you, do! Living vicariously through others is what literature is all about. The story of" Moby Dick" comes to mind. (Actually based on a similar happening at sea.)

It's a classic and I didn't have to take a Nantucket sleigh ride to enjoy it.

 

[psneeld]

Safety...or a more appropriate term "operational risk management" is a mindset. There are tools to help decision making but it all boils down to decision making and eliminating risks you can and minimizing those you can't.

Equipment or boat type hardly ever saves the foolhearty.

Experience doesn't save the foolhearty.

Uncomfortabe doesn't mean deadly.

And there still is a huge misunderstanding/labeling/whatever of the concepts of "coastal cruising" and "passagemaking" because even a jaunt down the ICW is completely different than sliding up the coast to Alaska.

 

[twistedtree]

Yes, don't get me wrong, it's not going to stop us from heading out. I just think it's prudent to consider and anticipate as much as possible, and think through how you will deal with it.

 

[Pau Hana]

Its funny, but a boater could easily read a thread like this one, (which is typical of internet based ocean boating discussions) and get so scared they never leave the safety of the harbor, or protected waters.

What a shame that would be. What a world they, and others that never venture forth would miss.

I admit that cruising away from the safety of the dock, or the bay poses risks. To some those risks are unacceptable. They are the dreamers. you'll hear them say "if I only had a bigger, or more capable boat I'd go" or "someday I'll have a XXXXX boat and be able to go".

Those people, and yes there are a few here, think guys like me venturing out into the Gulf Of Alaska, or Guys like SCARY taking his 26' Bayliner to Alaska are fools. That we put ourselves and our families at risk.

All I can say is that we're here, we're alive, and we've had a great adventure along the way. There's no wishing for us. Our only limitation is the time to fulfill our dreams.

 

[River Cruiser]

We always figured that you wouldn't boat very much if you waited for perfect or even good weather. About the only thing we haven't encountered that the Midwest weather can offer up is a tornado, been close but no cigar. My biggest fear is being at the mercy of the current & pushed into a dam or tow. Good pm practices on a boat with twins can about eliminate this possibility. I must be the odd cruiser who's desire for ocean or even coastal cruising is almost nil. I will admit a trip to New Orleans, Mobile Bay & the gulf coast is not out of the question. Pleasure craft means not being on my boat wishing I was somewhere else & I almost always want to be on my boat.

 

[123]

I think that under 45 foot its almost impossible to find a "real" passagemaker under power, the reason why i went for a 36 foot Motorsailor and yep a real trawler. Most boats will survive but the crew will be near to dead on a ocean passage. The motion of such a small trawler under "only" power in ocean conditions is terrible and exausting to the crew.

Sorry for the long qoute, but i think more then read worthy. Choosing a Passagemaker

Choosing a Passagemaker
By Dolph McCranie, DolphM@aol.com
the Right Whale, Krogen 48 Whaleback, hull #8​

I wanted a true passagemaker. Robert Beebe in his book "Voyaging Under Power" says that a true passagemaker is a motor boat that can make an open ocean passage sufficient to at least cross the smallest ocean, the Atlantic. The shortest route across is from Bermuda to the Azores; a distance of about 1,850 miles. A safety factor in excess of ten percent should also be included. I felt that the minimum range I would be satisfied with would be 2,250 nautical miles. And this at a speed that would allow us still more range if we traveled even more slowly.

We had owned two boats before. Our first was a 25 foot Grady White Sailfish. A trailerable hardcore fishing boat but not comfortable for extended cruising. We next moved to a Grand Banks 42. Again a wonderful boat but not one that would allow us to fulfill our dreams. It was our dream then as now; to cross the Atlantic Ocean in our own boat.

In addition, my wife Beverly and I were looking at a complete life style change. The pressures of my surgical practice and the "new " medicine had become too much. We opted for an early retirement and life as live aboards.

So we now had several criteria that the new boat had to meet: it had to be a true passagemaker, it had to be livable, it had to be affordable and above all it had to be seaworthy. Not an easy set of specifications to meet.

It was time to truly do our homework! I read everything I could get my hands on about long range motor boats. I was most helped by Robert Beebe's book, "Voyaging Under Power." This book has recently been revised by James Leishman. Mr. Leishman added to the book and had the excellent sense to leave Beebe's text essentially alone. The book is a treasure trove of information. The chapter on the arithmetic of power boats, by itself, is worth the price.

From this source and others, I learned about above water to below water ratios, displacement length ratios, hull speed ratios and prismatic coefficients. Not to mention the all important "trawler truth ratio." All of these add together to form the mathematical description of a boat. They will tell you what the designer intended the boat to do. That may or may not correspond to the advertising copy.

The D/L gives you a number to use in determining the relative heft of various boats. The larger the number the greater the interior volume and corresponding load carrying ability. The D/L ratio is equal to the displacement in long tons, (2,240 lbs), divided by the cube of the loaded waterline length divided by 100. You shouldn't have to derive the number; the manufacturer should provide it. Most passage making motor boats in the 50 foot range have a D/L near 270. The smaller the boat the larger the D/L must be to give the necessary load carrying capacity. The Nordhaven 46 with her LWL of 38.4 feet has a D/L of 383. The Krogen 48 with its LWL of 45.5 feet has a ratio of 267.

The above water to below water ratio is just that. The height of the boat above the water divided by its draft. Captain Beebe felt that a ratio of 2.6 was the maximum allowable for boats that were going to venture into waters that were historically very stormy, such as the north Atlantic.

Hull speed ratios can be determined by dividing the speed in knots by the square root of the loaded waterline length. Conversely the boat's speed at a given ratio can be determined by multiplying the hull speed ratio by the square root of the loaded waterline length.

For a boat with a LWL of 36 feet the square root is 6. Her speed at a hull speed ratio of 1.0 would be six knots. At a ratio of 1.2 it would be 1.2 * 6 or 7.2 knots. Her maximum theoretical hull speed would be 1.34 * 6 or 8.04 knots. She would be most economical between 6 and 7.2 knots (a ratio of 1.0 to 1.2). The boat could probably be driven to a hull speed ratio of 1.4 or about 8.5 knots but with a significant increase in fuel consumption.

Prismatic coefficient, when I first heard the term my eyes crossed! We don't have to worry about its derivation, just find out it's value. It is really a mathematical description of how pointed the ends of the boat are. But each prismatic coefficient has a corresponding hull speed ratio at which the hull is most efficient. In the speed regions in which most passagemakers operate, (hull speed ratios of 1.1 to 1.2), the most efficient prismatic coefficient is 0.6 or a little under. Some times compromises in prismatic coefficient are made in order to increase the D/L for more internal volume. This results in a less efficient hull requiring more power to push the boat through the water with a corresponding increase in fuel consumption.

The "trawler truth ratio" is important; it estimates how closely the boat in question resembles a true trawler. Most long distance yachts have a reasonable relation to true trawlers. They do not have, or need, the load carrying capacity of a fishing trawler. That is to say they have a smaller displacement length ratio. They do, however, have the needed internal volume to carry sufficient crew, fuel, food, and supplies for self sufficient long distance voyaging. They are full displacement hulls and usually carry ballast.

According to Beebe, the weight of the ballast should equal at least fifty percent of the weight of the fuel. This prevents the boat from becoming too light and too high in the water as the fuel is burned.

Full displacement means that your boat travels through the water not on top of it; it has to displace the water as it moves through it. Your speed through the water is limited to "hull speed" or slightly over. As we have said, hull speed is related to the waterline length of your boat. The theoretical maximum displacement hull speed is 1.34 times the square root of the loaded waterline length. When a speed equal to a hull speed ratio of two is reached the boat is planing. With enough power most semi-displacement boats can be driven over maximum displacement speed but pay a major fuel consumption penalty. True planing hulls of course are designed to exceed hull speed and proceed on top of, rather than in, the water. Most planing boats in the fifty foot or less size class have a relatively limited range, as do semi-displacement hulls, especially when forced to plane.

When making long passages, for reasons of economy and range, most boats, regardless of hull type, are run at hull speed ratios between 1.0 and 1.2. As you can see this means relatively slow speeds unless you have a very large boat. (Those freighters doing twenty knots or better are traveling at hull speed ratios of about 1.1 to 1.2 or so, their most economical speed).

In boats you can go fast or you can go far, but you can't go fast very far. (Unless you have a very large boat and budget!)

We thought a cruising speed of 8.5 knots would be adequate and give us room to slow down if needed for more range. A LWL of forty five to fifty feet would give us the desired cruising speed. Very small changes in speed can result in major reductions in fuel consumption and increases in range. (Our boat burns about 2.1 gph at 7.5 knots and 5.6 gph at 9 knots)

All boats are compromises. You just have to decide what it is you really want your boat to do and which set of compromises you can live with. No boat can do it all.

We wanted to live comfortably and travel long distances safely and economically. This required a boat with a hefty displacement/length ratio, a single engine, an efficient hull with the right prismatic coefficient as well as sufficient waterline length to give us our desired cruising speed.

Single engines, (I can hear the flack already), I feel, are more fuel efficient than twins and the shaft and prop are protected by the keel. Usually the rudder is large and is protected by a large skeg. Far safer in the North West with its floating debris, logs and ice. The large central rudder and full keel are also of great help in following seas. That having been said, I also feel that an alternative form of propulsion is necessary for safety. Ideally this should take the form of a wing engine with its' own prop and shaft.

Of the production boats available in 1994, when we placed our order, the choices that met our criteria were few. We looked at all of them but like "Goldy Locks" we only found one that was "Just Right." We ordered a Krogen Whaleback. The Whaleback has a prismatic coefficient of 0.601, a D/L of 268, an A/B ratio of 2.6, and a LWL of 45' 5".

This means that she is efficient at speeds from about 6.5 to 8.5 knots and can be driven to about 9.7 knots. With a fuel capacity of 1000 gallons her range at 7 knots (with a safety factor of about ten percent) should be in excess of 2,250 miles.

I believe the Whaleback to be the largest and most commodious 48 built. Jim Krogen, the designer, did something that few designers do, he lived on his own boats. The living spaces in the Whaleback rival that found in most 60 footers, yet it fills all of Robert Bebee's criteria of a boat that can cross the Atlantic and venture in to the North Atlantic. The above to below water ratio, displacement length ratio, prismatic coefficient and range are all there. Add to that a pilot house that is to die for, with 360 degree visibility, chart table, settee that converts to a watch berth etc. etc.

The floor plan we selected has three staterooms. The boat itself has about 700 square feet of living space. The main living area is all on one level with the pilot house accessible via a winding staircase. Beneath the main deck there are four compartments: a large lazarette, engine room, forward machinery space, and a forward compartment. The compartments are separated by very substantial bulkheads.

The engine room provides complete access to the engine and generator, albeit on hands and knees. In the machinery space there is a "sit down" work bench along with the water tanks, house batteries, fuel filters and plenty of room for stabilizers, water makers, air conditioners etc. The forward compartment houses the 100 gallon holding tank, bow thruster, batteries for the windlass and considerable storage. We kept our vegetables and beer here on the Alaska trip. It was our "root cellar."

The price of the boat includes the windlass, anchor and rode, 12 KW Northern Lights genset, Heart Interface 2500 watt inverter, compass, rudder angle indicator, Princess gas stove, microwave oven, washer dryer, and other equipment as standard.

The boat was purchased from Bob Grant, former owner of Seaward Yachts in Portland Oregon. Unfortunately Seaward was sold to Grand Yachts North West subsequent to our delivery, and Bob is no longer with the company.

The boat arrived January 11, 1996. The dealer, Bob Grant, and I went aboard before the off-loading. The boat was immaculate inside. In minutes the longshoremen had the covers off and the slings in place. We watched from the dealer's boat as ours was unloaded from the freighter and placed ever so gently in the Willamette River. After inspection, opening the raw water seacock, and filling the Cat with coolant the engine fired immediately.

Then it was off to the fuel dock and down the Columbia River to Ilwaco, Washington, for commissioning. It was in Ilwaco that the "out of the water" part of the commissioning was done. Here the epoxy barrier coat and bottom paint were applied and the heavy equipment installed. We installed a hydraulic bow thruster and stabilizers manufactured by Wesmar.

In addition, the wing engine, a fifty Hp Yanmar, was installed, along with its own shaft and feathering prop. This little engine by my calculation should be able to push the boat to at least six knots. Subsequent trials proved the calculations correct.

A Sea Recovery, 600 gallon per day, watermaker was installed and all through hulls for sensors, future air conditioning etc. were also installed at this time. We also added bypass oil filters, from Gulf Coast Filters, on both the main engine and generator.

It was then back up the river to Rogers Marine in Portland for installation of the electronics and the thousand and one other things that are needed on a cruising boat. Rogers did a wonderful, but not cheap, job of helping with equipment choices and installation. Thank you Cheryl and Dennis!

Here we installed for navigation a Garmin GPS plotter and a Northstar 941x with built in differential as co-GPS. Both are run through a selection panel to the two auto pilots. Either GPS can run either pilot.

The auto pilots are ComNav units a 1001 and a 1420 as back up. Both are completely independent and have their own pumps etc.

The radar is a 48 mile Furuno, model 1941. The fish finder is a V850 Raytheon unit. For a trip log we chose a Standard MD 50. The unit was later replaced with a similar Auto Helm device.

The VHF radios are Icom, a M 126 DSC and a M 58 for back-up. the SSB is also Icom, model 710. The combination loud hailer and auto fog horn is from Standard. The speakers also act as an on-deck intercom. Very handy when anchoring or docking.

Just when the long suffering people at Rogers thought they were done we added a diesel-fired forced-air heater by Espar to the list as well as an auto Halon fire extinguisher for the engine room. Subsequently we added smoke detectors in all of the enclosed spaces with warning lights and a buzzer in the pilot house.

Our dingy is a 10-foot Carribe RIB with a 15 Hp Yamaha outboard. We get the dink on and off using the mast and boom, (rated to lift 1000 lbs.). We cheated and mounted a small electric windlass at the base of the mast to do the real lifting. The system works very well!

We have a Givens life raft and a Litton 406 EPIRB. We also carry four rubber survival suits. That water in the north west is definitely cold!

How did all this stuff work, you ask? After a 5,000 mile maiden voyage cum shake-down cruise to Alaska and back, I feel that I can answer that question.

First the wing engine, we had occasion to need it several times. All of the problems but one requiring the wing engine involved the hydraulics. The shaft connecting the engine to the hydraulic pump was not substantial enough and broke three times. When this happens you have to shut down the main engine. The little Yanmar saved our bacon, big time! Self rescue is not only satisfying but beats the Hell out of being towed. Especially since help would have been many hours or days away. Besides you can't anchor in front of a glacier!

The stabilizers and thruster work great. I hope that we now have the bugs out of the system and will have no more trouble. The hydraulic system itself has never been a problem, only the connection to the engine. With the single engine and large rudder I find that I use the thruster less and less as time goes on.

With the Gulf Port filters we have not changed oil for 700 engine hours. We have had the oil analyzed twice by Caterpillar, and it has been normal both times. We saved at least three oil changes with their attendant mess and oil disposal problems, not to mention the expense.

The auto pilots, radios, radar, fish finder and GPS units worked without flaw. The only problem was the MD50. This may have been due to some creative wiring. The Auto Helm unit has worked well.

The main engine, Caterpillar 3208 NA, has been perfect, as has the Yanmar. The genset had an oil leak finally repaired in Canada. The leak was due to a crushed O-ring. Once that was replaced we had no further problem.

Fuel consumption proved nominal. We burned 2,300 gallons of diesel fuel in 644 engine hours and 400 genset hours. This includes a very uneconomical run from West Port Washington to Channel Islands Harbor. We ran the boat at about nine knots or better all the way down trying to beat the weather. We succeeded too, except for some 15 footers at the Oregon California border area.

The boat itself has been magnificent. We have had no significant problems at all. Docking from either side has been a breeze. The lack of side decks has not been a problem at all. More important both myself and my wife have adapted to life as live-aboards without a single fist fight. Bev says that she doesn't miss the big house or all the work that went with it. We have both lost weight, feel fit and our friends say we look younger too! (Do I hear a stampede?)

At this writing we are in Southern California, and, rather than go through the canal, as previously planned, we have decided to go back North to Canada and Alaska once more. The Inside Passage is 1,100 miles long, but there is 27,000 miles of coast line. There is so much to see and so many tiny settlements to visit that we felt bound to return.



References and recommended reading:

Voyaging Under Power, Beebe/Leishman, McGraw Hill
Cruising Under Power, Burke, Putnam
Stapleton's Power Cruising Bible, Stapleton, Hearst Marine Books
Sell Up and Sail, Cooper, Sheridan House
Sea Sense, Henderson, International Marine Publishing
Gentlemen Never Sail to Weather, Moore, Prospector Press

 

[Codger2]

Choosing A Passagemaker By Dolph McCranie, DolphM@aol.com the Right Whale, Krogen 48 Whaleback, hull #8

Absolutely an excellent, well written, concise and informative article. I loved it!

 

[caltexflanc]

The point is it doesn't take an ocean to have this happen. Pamlico and Albemarle sounds can both whip your butt in a heart beat. Even in a 60' Hatteras.

You betcha! We were crossing Albemarle Sound one day in conditions that were keeping other cruisers on the hook or docked back in Alligator River. A sail boat that we were in sight of was radioing back to others to stay put, they were really struggling (and not sailing, which would have helped). My wife was at the helm and I was taking a perfectly pleasant dreamland nap on the sofa. About 3/4 of the way over BAM! I was sent hurtling over the coffee table and across to the other side of the salon, quite the rude awakening. I am not an easy object to hurtle. The wife looked back and didn't see me and yelled out "George! Where are you?!" ... right here honey.. It was just one bad instant combination of waves hitting the boat at just the right angle. Everything was fine, but that was the end of the nap, though we had no further inconveniences the rest of the way. I did start to like the carpeting in the salon a lot more after that; we had been considering replacing it with wood floors.

 

[Moonstruck]

Absolutely an excellent, well written, concise and informative article. I loved it!

I concur. This is one of the best posts I ever read on Trawler Forum.

 

[sunchaser]

GG would be well served to communicate with Dutchman.

Also note his use of the wing engine, good thing it is there. I have in front of me the fuel burn of a KK52 with either a single JD 6068 or twin JD 4045s. The 4045s use about 10% more fuel at the same speed but the 6068 did not have the drag of a wing engine - it should.

 

[long-cours.62]

We went on the Krogen Site

But when we read :" Bridge Clearance Mast Down 17' - 6"" !!! it is too much for us , around 7' more than our actual boat.
It's mean a lot of windage , did you have infos concerning the hight of the CG and the AVS ?
Thanks