Transatlantic cross in single thread Trawler

[BandB]

Some thoughts...

Even if you never need your "get home" engine, having one adds peace of mind.

Sometimes peace of mind is all that separates folks that set forth, and folks that stay in port.

My questions about "get home" engines don't represent being comfortable with not having a second engine. I'm not convinced a "get home" engine in the 25 hp range can be an effective "get home" tool on an Atlantic crossing. However, it may well be effective in holding course while repairs are being made on the main engine. For that reason they may be valuable. So it might be better than not having one.

I'd say when it comes to such crossings, people fall into three distinct groups.

Group 1 would never cross in a private recreational vessel of any sort.

Group 2 would cross single handing, with a single engine and in relatively small boats, power or sail. These are adventurers and to others either brave or foolhardy or some combination of the two.

Group 3 would cross the Atlantic but would only do so in a larger boat, perhaps only with twin engines, and only with a larger crew rather than just one person.

While I respect the right of various boat owners to do as they wish and recognize that many have crossed single handed and some of those in extremely small boats (even under 20') of very questionable capability and others somewhere in between, I personally fit solidly in Group 3. I don't argue that it's the only way, but it's the only way I'd be comfortable. Now, I have very little problem with the idea of crossing with a single engine, although I want twins. Well maintained with a good capable crew, a single is acceptable even if not my preferred choice. However, the idea of crossing single handed, of sleeping while operating a boat and of not having a second person in the case of problems is not something I can personally gain any sense of comfort with. Menzies referenced MV Dirona in this thread. I read several of the "Nordhavn" posts on my flight today, including Gales, Steering Issue, and Alarms at 1:15 AM. I'm not saying one person wouldn't have made it, but their handling of those situations was very dependent on two capable persons aboard. Now, I even go a step further. It's pleasure boating for me and that doesn't mean days with inadequate sleep. I absolutely wouldn't cross single handed, but I personally wouldn't with only two people. My minimum crew would be three. My personal opinion, and everyone is entitled to their own, is that one person is dangerous and only two is just outside my definition of pleasure.

 

[MurrayM]

It's dangerous, even with three.

I used to rock climb solo, using a rope. No partner, where I was responsible for putting in the protection on lead, rappelling down, then climbing it again to clean the gear. Some people free solo, using no rope or gear at all. Both are dangerous, just as roped climbing with a partner is.

(The free solo climber would argue that climbing with a rope and gear is slow and wastes energy thereby making their style inherently safer...they are a special breed and have mind boggling skills/experience/confidence.)

Some people look forward to the challenges of solo endeavours while others just aren't comfortable with that level of responsibility. I'd argue that going solo makes one hyper aware during a challenging experience that's impossible to duplicate when someone else is involved.

 

[Lou_tribal]

It's dangerous, even with three.

I used to rock climb solo, using a rope. No partner, where I was responsible for putting in the protection on lead, rappelling down, then climbing it again to clean the gear. Some people free solo, using no rope or gear at all. Both are dangerous, just as roped climbing with a partner is.

The free solo climber would argue that climbing with a rope and gear is slow and wastes energy thereby making their style inherently safer...they are a special breed and have mind boggling skills/experience/confidence.

Some people look forward to the challenges of solo endeavours while others just aren't comfortable with that level of responsibility. I'd argue that going solo makes one hyper aware during a challenging experience that's impossible to duplicate when someone else is involved.

Everything is dangerous. You can climb with rope ans badly fell and get injured and you can free solo climb with nothing and never have a problem. It is more knowing your capabilities and limits. When you are aware of your limits and what you can do, everything else is managing risk and only as much dangerous as crossing the street. Yes things can happen, but my heart can stop beating while taping this message.
In a past life I was a serious climber, both with rope and free solo and never I went beyond what I knew was too much for me (well at least not when I was solo ).

L.

 

[MurrayM]

Everything is dangerous. You can climb with rope ans badly fell and get injured and you can free solo climb with nothing and never have a problem. It is more knowing your capabilities and limits. When you are aware of your limits and what you can do, everything else is managing risk and only as much dangerous as crossing the street. Yes things can happen, but my heart can stop beating while taping this message.
In a past life I was a serious climber, both with rope and free solo and never I went beyond what I knew was too much for me (well at least not when I was solo ).

Exactly. Risk is relative to preparation and resolve. Then there's random crap roaming the Universe which could ruin your day no matter how good or prepared you are.

Climbing was in a past life for me as well...nothing serious, eazy-peazy stuff even back in the day when 5.13 was thought to be impossible

 

[AusCan]

It's dangerous, even with three.

I can understand that Murray.

I used to rock climb solo, using a rope. No partner, where I was responsible for putting in the protection on lead, rappelling down, then climbing it again to clean the gear. Some people free solo, using no rope or gear at all. Both are dangerous, just as roped climbing with a partner is.

(The free solo climber would argue that climbing with a rope and gear is slow and wastes energy thereby making their style inherently safer...they are a special breed and have mind boggling skills/experience/confidence.)

Some people look forward to the challenges of solo endeavours while others just aren't comfortable with that level of responsibility. I'd argue that going solo makes one hyper aware during a challenging experience that's impossible to duplicate when someone else is involved.

I enjoy the hyper awareness that occurs with potentially high-risk sports. I still do a lot of backcountry skiing (climbing with AT gear) in remote areas where I may not see another person for days other than my partner. We take precautions (avalanche training, carry beacons, shovels and probes, etc) but I really enjoy pushing the boundaries. I still like to go solo occasionally, but reduce other risk levels significantly to compensate.
I'm one of those type 2 people that enjoys the adrenaline buzz, but I still need to weigh up the risks and take the appropriate mitigation measures.

 

[BandB]

I've experienced real risk, not in a sporting situation, and I have no interest or drive to experience it in a sport or adventure. I believe in managing risk and I admit to being very conservative in that regard. I don't need the adrenaline rush, other ways I get that. I have no desire to be in another life and death situation. Once in a lifetime is more than enough.

 

[MurrayM]

I've experienced real risk, not in a sporting situation, and I have no interest or drive to experience it in a sport or adventure. I believe in managing risk and I admit to being very conservative in that regard. I don't need the adrenaline rush, other ways I get that. I have no desire to be in another life and death situation. Once in a lifetime is more than enough.

It takes all kinds to make the world go around and there's lots of room for everyone in the pool

 

[ksanders]

My questions about "get home" engines don't represent being comfortable with not having a second engine. I'm not convinced a "get home" engine in the 25 hp range can be an effective "get home" tool on an Atlantic crossing. However, it may well be effective in holding course while repairs are being made on the main engine. For that reason they may be valuable. So it might be better than not having one.

I'd say when it comes to such crossings, people fall into three distinct groups.

Group 1 would never cross in a private recreational vessel of any sort.

Group 2 would cross single handing, with a single engine and in relatively small boats, power or sail. These are adventurers and to others either brave or foolhardy or some combination of the two.

Group 3 would cross the Atlantic but would only do so in a larger boat, perhaps only with twin engines, and only with a larger crew rather than just one person.

While I respect the right of various boat owners to do as they wish and recognize that many have crossed single handed and some of those in extremely small boats (even under 20') of very questionable capability and others somewhere in between, I personally fit solidly in Group 3. I don't argue that it's the only way, but it's the only way I'd be comfortable. Now, I have very little problem with the idea of crossing with a single engine, although I want twins. Well maintained with a good capable crew, a single is acceptable even if not my preferred choice. However, the idea of crossing single handed, of sleeping while operating a boat and of not having a second person in the case of problems is not something I can personally gain any sense of comfort with. Menzies referenced MV Dirona in this thread. I read several of the "Nordhavn" posts on my flight today, including Gales, Steering Issue, and Alarms at 1:15 AM. I'm not saying one person wouldn't have made it, but their handling of those situations was very dependent on two capable persons aboard. Now, I even go a step further. It's pleasure boating for me and that doesn't mean days with inadequate sleep. I absolutely wouldn't cross single handed, but I personally wouldn't with only two people. My minimum crew would be three. My personal opinion, and everyone is entitled to their own, is that one person is dangerous and only two is just outside my definition of pleasure.

Everyone is comfortable wth their own level of staffing for a long cruise.
I have personally made long jurnies, of over 1500 MN with two crew total, and had no problems.
If I was single handing I would have no problem crashing/napping on the pilothouse setee during longer runs.

We can over think this to a point where we just won't go. I'll use Richard as an example. He's actually out there, making ocean crossings, all by himself... and it's workjing out just fine!

 

[MurrayM]

We can over think this to a point where we just won't go. I'll use Richard as an example. He's actually out there, making ocean crossings, all by himself... and it's workjing out just fine!

Yup.

 

[Snapdragon III]

I feel that the line of thinking that the wing engine is useless because it isn't powerful enough is way off base. You would never attempt an ocean crossing in a small power boat unless you were taking a trade wind route and expected the majority of it to be down wind. These are the same route's that people cross the oceans in row boats! It may be slow, but a 30hp wing engine would easily get 50' trawler across the ocean, when traveling down wind, and generate enough power to keep your navigation and autopilot running. If you were caught in a huge storm on the nose that was too much for the wing engine you could always wait it out on a storm anchor, then continue on when things calmed down. I have known several people that have limped in on small trolling motors on their fishing boats, turning situations that could have been very dangerous, and or expensive, into minor inconveniences.

 

[Lucky Chucky]

Bigslick,

I own Selene 4326. Single screw, full displacement, 64,000 lbs, 800 gls fuel with a polisher, 200 gls water, 8kw lugger generator, 16gph water maker, stabilizers, etc.

Great boat and sexy design. Head turning.

Before I bought the Selene, I study the single vs twin screw for a year and opted for single for performance reasons.

Pay close attention to where your prop seals are...how they are aligned to the keel and what a get home engine would do to change that configuration.

Mariners have been using single screws for a very, very, very long time.

Good luck!!!

~lucky chucky

 

[alfamike]

Crossing oceans with Single screw boat under 65 feet

I have not crossed an ocean, but I have taken my old Diesel trawler that was 48 feet long to Hawaii @ 2,400 Miles each way & back on her own bottom with a single diesel engine a couple times & would do it again with proper preparation on that boat or on my Kadey-Krogen 42.

Keys are: 1. - proper preparation 2, - proper weather window at 3. - right time of year & 4. - properly equipped boat with 5. - proper staffed crew with proper training & experience & spare parts.

It is not something for every body as couple weeks straight on a boat under 50 feet is not something every one is comfortable with.

I find that I enjoy the journey as much as the destination.

Alfa Mike

 

[BruceK]

In 1975 Aussie grandmother Ann Gash sailed a wooden 26ft Nordic Folkboat sailboat solo around the world. Not a non stop voyage, she made stops, wanting to visit the grandkids in UK. Can`t be sure but if it had a motor it was likely a single cylinder, probably gas.
The Folkboat is long keeled,famed for it`s heavy weather abilities,rudder hung off the back of the keel. It is the result of a design competition in the 1940s in Scandinavia for a heavy weather "people`s boat". Ann Gash hit a reef and sank the boat near Sydney not long after completing the voyage. The Folkboat Association bought her another one.
In 2015 another Folkboat owner crossed the Atlantic, again solo.
I believe there is a racing fleet in San Francisco. I have owned one in Sydney, it was a wonderful small sailboat. If a Folkboat can do it solo...

 

[knotheadcharters]

I have navigated pretty much all over the world both in the Navy and as a Merchant Mainer and unless you just happen to want to do a transpac or translant for bragging rights, more power to you. It's boring and you are on your own. I know a lot of people do it and good for them. I would just ship my boat, less wear and tear and a hell of a lot safer. I know Richard on Dauntless has been cruising the hell out of his 42 KK and a lot of the time single handed, but it's just not interesting enough for me to want to do it.
There is no way you can maintain a proper watch for multiple weeks with 1,2,or 3 people. Fatigue will set in and that's when mistakes are made. Top the fatigue with even and minor malfunction or emergency and the risk of something bad happening increases exponentially.

 

[Bay Pelican]

Bay Pelican has a 27 hp wing engine with a self pitching prop. The wing engine has three uses:

Maneuvering, the wing engine with its self pitching Max prop pulls to port in reverse. The opposite of the main engine. When docking or more frequently for us when anchoring in a close situation we use both engines to maneuver. I "exercise" the wing engine by always turning it on whenever we enter or leave a harbor or marina. It serves as a trolling motor for that last mile before anchoring or docking.

Electricity, this is a sailboat engine that accepts a large alternator. When our generator has gone down we have survived at anchor charging our batteries using the wing engine.

Get home, our wing engine has a separate shaft, separate prop and isolated fuel supply. We have never had a complete shut down of our Lehman 135. However we have had fuel problems and problems with stabilizers which have required us to temporarily shut the main engine down for repairs. In these cases the wing engine has steadied the boat.

 

[Bay Pelican]

Bay Pelican has a 27 hp wing engine with a self pitching prop. The wing engine has three uses:

Maneuvering, the wing engine with its self pitching Max prop pulls to port in reverse. The opposite of the main engine. When docking or more frequently for us when anchoring in a close situation we use both engines to maneuver. I "exercise" the wing engine by always turning it on whenever we enter or leave a harbor or marina. It serves as a trolling motor for that last mile before anchoring or docking.

Electricity, this is a sailboat engine that accepts a large alternator. When our generator has gone down we have survived at anchor charging our batteries using the wing engine.

Get home, our wing engine has a separate shaft, separate prop and isolated fuel supply. We have never had a complete shut down of our Lehman 135. However we have had fuel problems and problems with stabilizers which have required us to temporarily shut the main engine down for repairs. In these cases the wing engine has steadied the boat.

 

[FF]

"There is no way you can maintain a proper watch for multiple weeks with 1,2,or 3 people."

With 3 folks we have used 3 on 6 off with no problems , but only for a week sailing offshore to the Carib.

See no problem if Murphy Gauges were used on a power boat for longer time at sea.

 

[bayview]

IMO the only reasonable way to cross oceans is above 30,000 feet.

 

[MurrayM]

For some people, going solo without supplemental oxygen is the most fulfilling way to climb Mount Everest.

 

[North Baltic sea]

I did not cross the ocean, but I cruised 74 days over 1200 nm without any problem, I came back from the beginning of the week.


If you are servicing and purchasing enough spare parts for your journey and your boat is designed over the ocean, I see no reason why one screw would not be enough.


There may be an abundance of other problems that can cause serious problems.(Container, fishing lines, whale, thunder, disease scene etc.)


Here is the link to the most common problems.

10 top causes of engine breakdown - and how to avoid them - Practical Boat Owner

 

[Wxx3]

I have not crossed an ocean, but I have taken my old Diesel trawler that was 48 feet long to Hawaii @ 2,400 Miles each way & back on her own bottom with a single diesel engine a couple times & would do it again with proper preparation on that boat or on my Kadey-Krogen 42.

Keys are: 1. - proper preparation 2, - proper weather window at 3. - right time of year & 4. - properly equipped boat with 5. - proper staffed crew with proper training & experience & spare parts.

It is not something for every body as couple weeks straight on a boat under 50 feet is not something every one is comfortable with.

I find that I enjoy the journey as much as the destination.

Alfa Mike

So. You guys know that AlfaMike is my brother, right.

We were separated at birth and my real idiot brother replaced him.

Now you know why i like K-dramas so much; many have a birth secret.
Evidently Koreans can't tell themselves apart.
But i digress.

Kevin Sanders is right, it's about piece of mind. No more no less.

I only do engine room checks underway about 2x per day. Why? 2 reasons:

1. It's easier to recognize a significant difference after a length of time.

2. It's about managing stress. If I'm worried all the time. That doesn't help.

Think about it, you may not have crossed am ocean, but I'm sure you had occasion to do an overnight drive.

How many times was your heart in your throat because you heard an unexpected noise in the middle of the night?
In the middle of the Atlantic, that's amplified 10x, 100x.

How i dealt with it, is to manage my time "looking" for problems.

And the simple fact is that in two ocean crossings, ALL the problems have ALL been obvious.

Just like the fuel issue I the first 5 days. In hindsight, I'd have been better off if I'd never noticed it, because it went away the day after i noticed it. But not after 24 hours of worry.

Also, I've only spent 10 days of 50 days alone on the open ocean.

Having another person is extremely helpful, but IF and ONLY IF, they are the right person.
There are stories of boats sunk because of crew that was not helpful or trying to be too helpful (re the Fitzgerald)

So far, there has been no crisis I could not have overcome alone.
The problem with the bent paravane pole would have been solved on 15 minutes instead of 30, but everything else, same time.

But both my nephew Micah, and new friend Cliff, gave me peace of mind and moral support when I needed it.

Lastly, for all of you who say you want 2, 3 or 4 people onboard.
I'm sure the commercial mariners will understand, but the more you have, the greater the responsibility.
And trust me, it's something that's tangible.
If i had 4 others, I'd do no watches and sleep not at all.

Oh, if my brother ever read this forum, would he be my idiot brother!

 

[Lou_tribal]

We were separated at birth and my real idiot brother replaced him.

Nice for the real brother, hope he is not member of TF lol

L.

 

[FF]

"You would never attempt an ocean crossing in a small power boat unless you were taking a trade wind route and expected the majority of it to be down wind."

Most cargo ships still use "Low Powered Steam" routing as found in Ocean Passages for the World.

10 top causes of engine breakdown -

Probably right , did not the gaggle of Nordhavens that crossed have a boat that needed rescue swimmers to fix electric problems?

 

[Wxx3]

"You would never attempt an ocean crossing in a small power boat unless you were taking a trade wind route and expected the majority of it to be down wind."

I take exception to the word "trade" above.
The North Atlantic does NOT have trade winds, but does have prevailing westerly winds which make a west to east crossing possible.

When i decide to travel to another continent, my first and only stop, is Jimmy Cornell's "World Cruising Routes"

Which is also why when wanting to get from Europe to Asia. I came west, instead of the Indian Ocean.

 

[HopCar]

Wxx3 Richard, it occurred to me that a big sea anchor might've been nice to have if your engine broke in the middle of the ocean. It would keep your bow into the seas while you worked on the engine.

What do you think? Did you carry one?

 

[chriscritchett]

Wxx3 Richard, it occurred to me that a big sea anchor might've been nice to have if your engine broke in the middle of the ocean. It would keep your bow into the seas while you worked on the engine.



What do you think? Did you carry one?

I thought this was starting to sound like an anchor discussion...

 

[HopCar]

I thought this was starting to sound like an anchor discussion...

Sorry about that. Broke my own rule, I used the A word.

 

[chriscritchett]

Sorry about that. Broke my own rule, I used the A word.

Ha, no worries on my part. Just commenting on how many ways there are to do things, and how many opinions are formed about them. Such is life.

 

[Wxx3]

Wxx3 Richard, it occurred to me that a big sea anchor might've been nice to have if your engine broke in the middle of the ocean. It would keep your bow into the seas while you worked on the engine.

What do you think? Did you carry one?

No, because you didn't sell me one.
Seriously, I thought I needed one, but as time goes on, it becomes less and less of an issue.

In my blog post today, I have the video of me replacing the hydraulic hoses. But the video doesn't show the big seas we were in.

The Krogen rolls as a function of it's speed thru the water under any given set of seas.
When dead in the water, she pitches more, but rolls significantly less.

She basically bobs up and down.

In my first year, I was terrified of broaching. I couldn't imagine stopping in big seas.
Well, the first Atlantic crossing put and end to that, as i had to stop twice in 12 to 20 foot seas.
I was too stressed to realize how well she sits when stopped.

So, letting her do her thing without any interference from me seems best.

Now one caveat. In moderate seas, if she gets a big wake, she will progressively roll 3x in ever bigger rolls.
I've had occasion to push someone off the wheel (because they were not reacting) to let me counter steer before that third roll, because it will be a doozy, almost 30°