*Blue Water* Bahama cruising?

[Bud]

Bud the statistics and experience say exactly the opposite. Simply put your statement is untrue.

When voyaging we do everything we can without stressing the boat to maximize VMG. Speed means:
Shorter passage. Less time exposed to potential weather. Less time for injury or illness to occur. Less time for food or water to run out.
Speed means:
More ability to avoid weather. Shorter interval to get help if outside help is needed. Less likely that mission fatigue will set in leading to human errors. Less likely that human interactions will deteriorate causing human errors or degraded performance.
The business of hitting lost containers or other debris is way overblown. In both sail and power with the boats you’re talking about it would make little or no difference in outcome if you struck something. And the the likelihood of that occurring is most remote.

I disagree, and my opinion comes from my experience. Statistics can say whatever you want them to say just ask a statistician. I spent a good part of my life in the Gulf of Maine and the seas did not allow much speed safely most of the year in our class of vessel. Just plain commen sense tells me to go slower in higher risk enviroments. My wife and I went on a ride on a MTI catamaran recently with a freind and we reached 108 MPH in a 1.5ft chop. It was stimulating., but it definetly was not as safe as or glacier bay catamaran or our trawler. In am reminded of the tortoise who was the winner of the race with the hare.

Bud

 

[mvweebles]

Continue to believe coastal is every bit as dangerous as blue water. All this discussion about coastal v blue water conditions isn’t germane. It’s about endurance and self sufficiency as well as expectations.

You are in good company with Bernard Moitessier (who instead of completing the first Golden Globe race in the 1960's - he was winning - decided to continue around the globe a second time). While technology has greatly improved access to and accuracy of weather forecasting, it remains a variable risk that I can better manage via coastal cruising and 3-day rolling decisions. For me, maintainability and weather planning are key to my cruising plans.

There is a difference between planned self-sufficiency (Bahamas) and forced self-sufficiency (Moitessier in the Southern Ocean). Call it Blue Water, call it whatever. It's rare in the boating world, more rare with powerboats than sailboats.

Peter

 

[mvweebles]

I disagree, and my opinion comes from my experience. Statistics can say whatever you want them to say just ask a statistician. I spent a good part of my life in the Gulf of Maine and the seas did not allow much speed safely most of the year in our class of vessel. Just plain commen sense tells me to go slower in higher risk enviroments. My wife and I went on a ride on a MTI catamaran recently with a freind and we reached 108 MPH in a 1.5ft chop. It was stimulating., but it definetly was not as safe as or glacier bay catamaran or our trawler. In am reminded of the tortoise who was the winner of the race with the hare.

Bud

Personally, I was talking relative speed - 10-12 kts vs 6-7 kts. 250 nm/day vs 150 nm/day. Big, big difference.

Peter

 

[Hippocampus]

Bud thought we were talking about speed in the context of blue water. You’re absolutely right in coastal settings extreme speed is more dangerous.

 

[Bobby Lex]

This is blue water. It has nothing to do with the distance travelled.

I've always looked at blue water as a function of time. Anytime I was 24+ hours away from the nearest land, I considered myself effectively to be in blue water.

Bob

 

[Hippocampus]

Guess we’re going to have to agree to disagree. The definition I proposed isn’t from me. Among my fellow blue water sailors it includes the concepts they (and I) generally use when contemplating a voyage. The specifics included have immediate impact on how you think, plan and execute the voyage. Your decisions as to what vessel is appropriate to use, how to outfit, what crew to take, what supplies, what contingencies to plan for.
Gulf of Maine is near shore. The worst storm I was ever in was in the gulf of Maine. We were declared overdue and SAR was activated. The video is of Beaufort scale 4 to 5 , moderate breeze 11-16’k wave height 3.-6’ to Beaufort 5 fresh breeze 17-21k 6-10’. Although this is common offshore weather it’s also common near shore weather. It does not define blue water.
Early today I chatted with my boat broker. For months now we been trying to find a Nordhavn or other suitable bluewater trawler. We’ve been on Nordhavns, Katy krogans, had discussions with Sea Horse and Diesel Duck manufacturers. We’ve looked at two one offs as well. Of the Nordhavns only one of 8 boats we’ve seen or did FaceTime video calls was set up as a blue water boat. We went to a KK open house in Annapolis. Of the 6 kady krogans one . Of the Diesel Ducks 2 out 4 the 38 wasn’t nor the 41 home brew. The one in Turkey and the one in California were.
There are blue water trawlers. They are a combination of design, execution of build, and outfitting.
Go to any blue water cruising organization or discuss with any naval architect and you’ll see I’m not a lonely voice in the woods.
Hell just read Beebe’s book. That’s blue water.

 

[BandB]

You are all just creating definitions for blue water based on how you've used the term. Some of you have decided that the OCCI requires evidence of ocean crossing, so therefore that's the definition. Others have decided it's a function of distance and others have decided speed. However, it's a naval term and they defined it by location, by distance offshore. I referenced this is post #22. They didn't quantify a specific distance but just offshore, so I put the 12 nm.

However, the term came not from size of wave or type boat but perceived color of water. Inland water is often brown and muddy looking so it's "brown water". Coastal water is somewhere between that and ocean water and often green so called "green water." Ocean water due to depth often is very blue so hence "blue water." These terms are based on color, not based on voyaging, not bases of anything else. You're very much overthinking and overcomplicating it.

Now, I have no idea how the blue shallows of the Bahamas fit in as the color defies their location. Still I'll call them green waters.

Brown, Green, and Blue are colors. Yellow snow is a color as would be yellow water. Red sky is a color. I don't know flowers so I just refer to them by color.

 

[RT Firefly]

 

[menzies]

You are all just creating definitions for blue water based on how you've used the term. Some of you have decided that the OCCI requires evidence of ocean crossing, so therefore that's the definition. Others have decided it's a function of distance and others have decided speed. However, it's a naval term and they defined it by location, by distance offshore. I referenced this is post #22. They didn't quantify a specific distance but just offshore, so I put the 12 nm.

However, the term came not from size of wave or type boat but perceived color of water. Inland water is often brown and muddy looking so it's "brown water". Coastal water is somewhere between that and ocean water and often green so called "green water." Ocean water due to depth often is very blue so hence "blue water." These terms are based on color, not based on voyaging, not bases of anything else. You're very much overthinking and overcomplicating it.

Now, I have no idea how the blue shallows of the Bahamas fit in as the color defies their location. Still I'll call them green waters.

Brown, Green, and Blue are colors. Yellow snow is a color as would be yellow water. Red sky is a color. I don't know flowers so I just refer to them by color.

Actually Bahamian waters are gin colored!

It's the color of the sand on the bottom (fifty feet down) that you are seeing!

 

[Hippocampus]

At least we don’t sail where the [Mod Edit] "Inuits" go.

Many may not be aware:
Although the name "Eskimo" was commonly used in Alaska to refer to Inuit and Yupik people of the world, this usage is now considered unacceptable by many or even most Alaska Natives, largely since it is a colonial name imposed by non-Indigenous people.
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/eskimo

 

[boating rich]

Blue water boats can go places that few crew can with their skills or strengths.

 

[menzies]

I think of Blue Water cruising as way they hell out there. Like Oceanic, or at least a few hundred miles out. Minimum. Lately I've seen some posts describing Bahama cruising as "Blue Water". Bahamas are 50 miles off Florida. Why is it considered Blue Water cruising?

So, got your answer?

 

[boating rich]

What trawlers are considered blue water boats? What features do they need?

 

[menzies]

What trawlers are considered blue water boats? What features do they need?

In simple terms, they have all of the safety features in design, mechanics and equipment, have legs, and can take a pounding while remaining somewhat stable.

However, as mentioned, having a blue water crew can be just as important!

Sonas can make it to Bermuda and back easily with good weather planning (770nm) - but can the crew handle what we might meet?

Or even do we want to? 4 days with nothing to see but just moving water to an island where it will take just another 4 days to see. Cruising is supposed to be pleasureable!

 

[mvweebles]

I am pretty sure the most common recreational vessel transiting the Panama Canal is not a trawler, and not a sailboat. But a sport fisher. In many ways, the antithesis of a trawler.

Powerboats crossing oceans? No doubt, motoryacht style boats in the 65+ foot range. Big enough to carry stores and spares, and having lux accommodations. Older versions of these are often sold for surprisingly affordable prices.

We can debate what constitutes a Blue Water boat until the cows come home. While we're sitting at dock doing so, many vessels that don't make the cut are easily doing Blue Water passages.

Need to broaden the definition and horizons. Many trawlers rarely get out of sight of land unless stricken in fog.

Peter

 

[boating rich]

Well said. I was 150 miles off the coast of Southern California in my blue water sailboat and we passed a guy in a 16 foot aluminum with an outboard...

 

[Peter B]

Alessandro di Benedetto, in 2010, broke the record for the smallest boat to sail around the world non-stop in his 21-foot Mini 6.5. So long as you don’t mind forgoing a few comforts, you can have big dreams on a small budget.

 

[Willin]

Regarding the Bahamas I’d say the “blue water. portion is the Gulf Stream. But it is such a short crossing from Florida that blue water skill described in this thread aren’t really required. Just a weather window. A fast boat will get to Bimini in 90 minutes. But if there is a Northerly or a tropical depression the G Steam can act up, I crossed once on the tail end of a tropical depression with 5 foot chop on top of 20 foot swells. But the weather was off the stern quarter so it was a safe but thrilling ride in my 25 foot deep vee dive boat. The Donzi company once delivered 5 Sweet Sixteen 16 foot boats from Miami to. Nassau on their own bottom.

 

[BrianG]

Well said. I was 150 miles off the coast of Southern California in my blue water sailboat and we passed a guy in a 16 foot aluminum with an outboard...

that's insane.

 

[Group9]

I've had my butt kicked crossing the Gulf Stream to the Bahamas a lot harder than on some "real bluewater passages" I've been on.

 

[Peter B]

Yep, the reason is speed.

In fact I would argue that speed is the anthesis of safety.

Menzies, with all due respect, (and I'm not just trying to be cunning - maybe a bit pedantic )you used the wrong word. I think you meant antithesis, and in fact that means the opposite to...I think you meant analogous = similar to or effectively same as...eg speed analogous to safety (at sea)..?

https://www.bing.com/search?q=meaning+of+anthesis&form=APMCS1&PC=APMC

https://www.bing.com/search?q=meaning+of+analogous&form=APMCS1&PC=APMC

 

[menzies]

No, I meant that speed is the enemy of safety.

 

[mvweebles]

No, I meant that speed is the enemy of safety.

Why do you say this?

 

[rslifkin]

No, I meant that speed is the enemy of safety.

Improper use of speed goes against safety, but I'd say having it available gives more options, which means more safety.

 

[menzies]

Why do you say this?

On a base level, when you have to make a decision, doing so at speed is a higher risk due the reduced time from decision to consequence of that decision.

 

[BandB]

On a base level, when you have to make a decision, doing so at speed is a higher risk due the reduced time from decision to consequence of that decision.

And doing it slowly is a higher risk due to the fact you may respond too late to avoid the consequence.

 

[menzies]

And doing it slowly is a higher risk due to the fact you may respond too late to avoid the consequence.

We are talking about the boat speed while you are making the decision, not the speed at which you make the decision.

 

[BandB]

We are talking about the boat speed while you are making the decision, not the speed at which you make the decision.

Speed sure helps in implementing the decision.

 

[Peter B]

No, I meant that speed is the enemy of safety.

Ok, then that's fine, but you still used the wrong word - you meant antithesis, not anthesis...see the links, post#51. No biggie - just sayin'...

Personally I think both concepts are right. Speed certainly helps when considering the actual time to make a passage, or when wanting to avoid a bad weather event, and going slow makes sense where the possibility of hitting something or taking just too much water over the deck is an issue.

 

[BrianG]

Speed sure helps in implementing the decision.

Isn't the argument supposed to be about the inherent capability of a given boat design to handle extreme conditions? My question wold be if a full keel is slower and inherently less safe, why would there be a market for them? Because the operator gets a longer reaction time? That doesn't sould like a compelling sales pitch.