what makes a trawler suitable for ocean crossings?

[DaveGibson]

Tankage. You want a range of 4,000 miles, both water and fuel.

Stabilizers. They'll smooth out the ride considerably. I can't imagine owning a trawler without them. The nicest feature on my 46 footer.

Two helm stations- one inside.

Electronics. Don't skimp here. Get the latest and the best.

Twin engines. And never run on only one to "save" the other or lower operating costs. If you can't afford to run twins, get a sailboat.

 

[Adagio43]

You are right most trawlers, unless you want to spend several million dollars, are not suitable for crossing oceans. If you want to cross the Atlantic and you’re not in a hurry and don’t have several million dollars to spend get a sailboat.

 

[Brooksie]

While my Willard 36 has proven to be very able in adverse conditions, the welldeck volume vs: freeing port area is very troubling. The port locations are such that even if they were somewhere near large enough, they would be underwater with a sea in the cockpit. I have added 2 4" freeing ports w/ checkvalves further aft but I would still not consider her an ocean crosser by any means although a sister has ventured to Hawaii. There is just too much volume too close to the waterline.
Cute and seaworthy yes, survival in really bad conditions no.

 

[key goose]

very nice answer and boat MYT

Carlos

 

[arcadia]

The captain.

 

[dirtdoc1]

A great read is Beebe's "Voyaging Under Power". It is about this very question and answers virtually all of them.. The more recent editions are Nordhavn edited, but still very good.

ditto

Here are a few things off the top of my head:

-full displacement hull
-more deck drainage
-more fuel
-more freeboard
-smaller windows (probably thicker too)
-ballast
-stronger hull with reinforced stem
-(if single engine) wing engine
-commercial rated engine(s)?
-more fridge/freezer capacity
-back up systems (meaning two of everything)
-water maker
-water chest (instead of multiple through-hulls)
-stabilizers

 

[Salish Nomad]

Leaving the stern gate open is something I would do if necessary except in following seas.
I have seen videos of sports fishermen back down, stern gate closed and still the water all but flooded the cockpit.
Back to common sense.

And we can "dog down" all of the outside opening doors if necessary!

 

[OldDan1943]

ditto

Here are a few things off the top of my head:

-full displacement hull
-more deck drainage
-more fuel
-more freeboard
-smaller windows (probably thicker too) Edit: 1/2 inch I think
-ballast
-stronger hull with reinforced stem
-(if single engine) wing engine
-commercial rated engine(s)?
-more fridge/freezer capacity Edit: cold plate
-back up systems (meaning two of everything)
-water maker
-water chest (instead of multiple through-hulls)
-stabilizers

I like that list.
With my noted Edits.

Now add a generator, gas stove, bilge pumps with great capacity and some sort of environmental control ie reverse cycle A/C and maybe an oil furnace, depending where one is going to cruise.

Now, not to disagree with you but, what is your reason for a sea chest?

 

[Sealife]

Oogachaka a 42 Krogen did the pacific crossing.

https://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s36/kk-42-mexico-marquesas-19-5-days-14614.html

 

[Simi 60]

Electronics. Don't skimp here. Get the latest and the best.

The latest and greatest does not a mariner make.
I've crossed oceans with paper and hand held GPS and plenty have done it with less.

Even now we use FREE opencpn, better than the paid for navionics and commercial grade Seiwa/Cmap plotter we have.

Twin engines. And never run on only one to "save" the other or lower operating costs. If you can't afford to run twins, get a sailboat.

Flawed assumption that sailboats are cheap to run and maintain

 

[rslifkin]

The latest and greatest does not a mariner make.
I've crossed oceans with paper and hand held GPS and plenty have done it with less.

Even now we use FREE opencpn, better than the paid for navionics and commercial grade Seiwa/Cmap plotter we have.




Flawed assumption that sailboats are cheap to run and maintain

Absolutely agreed on not necessarily needing the fanciest nav gear. It's more about getting something modern that does what you want / need it to and is reliable.



For the sailboat thing, it's not that they're cheaper to run, but that there's a wider range of sailboats out there capable of crossing an ocean, which means you can often obtain one cheaper than an equally capable powerboat.

 

[mvweebles]

I dunno. Problems I have with this thread are it focuses on the boat vs seamanship skills; and being underway vs at-rest which is 99% of the time. It's the problem I have with pilot house style boats. They are built for the 1%.

Peter

 

[OldDan1943]

Oogachaka a 42 Krogen did the pacific crossing.

https://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s36/kk-42-mexico-marquesas-19-5-days-14614.html

With a fairly large fuel bladder strapped down in the saloon. I do hope they emptied the bladder first, folded it up and stowed it outside. LOL

 

[mvweebles]

While my Willard 36 has proven to be very able in adverse conditions, the welldeck volume vs: freeing port area is very troubling. The port locations are such that even if they were somewhere near large enough, they would be underwater with a sea in the cockpit. I have added 2 4" freeing ports w/ checkvalves further aft but I would still not consider her an ocean crosser by any means although a sister has ventured to Hawaii. There is just too much volume too close to the waterline.
Cute and seaworthy yes, survival in really bad conditions no.

Thanks for posting this. I could not agree more. Willards have an incredible hull, and a great layout, as do other boats. But there are some chinks in the armour - windows and downflooding potential being two. Both vulnerabilities could be remediated fairly economically.

In the end, it's really difficult to plan for survival conditions - a boat that will accept 6-meter breaking waves but be crushed by 8-meter waves.

Best is to stay south of 5640m isobar on 500mb chart and expect no more than Force 7 conditions.

Peter

 

[mvweebles]

Oogachaka a 42 Krogen did the pacific crossing.

https://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s36/kk-42-mexico-marquesas-19-5-days-14614.html

Great story. Their blog link is dead. Anyone know what time of year this was done?

 

[Simi 60]

.



For the sailboat thing, it's not that they're cheaper to run, but that there's a wider range of sailboats out there capable of crossing an ocean, which means you can often obtain one cheaper than an equally capable powerboat.

I base it on a same level of comfort and amenities

The sailing vessel that would come anywhere near close to what we enjoy now is going to cost a vast amount of money more than what we have and, the upkeep of rig and sails will likely cost more than we burn in fuel.

Also, it will likely use its engine quite a bit and given size of that sailing boat, its engine would be up there in size.

 

[Brooksie]

Thanks for posting this. I could not agree more. Willards have an incredible hull, and a great layout, as do other boats. But there are some chinks in the armour - windows and downflooding potential being two. Both vulnerabilities could be remediated fairly economically.
Peter

"Both vulnerabilities could be remediated fairly economically."
My cockpit has water running in one scupper and out the other when rolling along in a seaway, So the existing scuppers would be worse than useless with the weight of a sea in the cockpit. If one were 5' tall one could raise the entire deck a foot and put in a row of proper, flapped, freeing ports on each side, Short of that, no real way to get rid of water in the well deck b/4 the next sea arrives.
The freeing ports I did install do not and could not come into play with less than 6" of water in the well. At that point the scuppers would be underwater, flaps on them might close them off and if she hadn't settled by more than 6", water would drain from the new ports.

 

[mvweebles]

"Both vulnerabilities could be remediated fairly economically."
My cockpit has water running in one scupper and out the other when rolling along in a seaway, So the existing scuppers would be worse than useless with the weight of a sea in the cockpit. If one were 5' tall one could raise the entire deck a foot and put in a row of proper, flapped, freeing ports on each side, Short of that, no real way to get rid of water in the well deck b/4 the next sea arrives.
The freeing ports I did install do not and could not come into play with less than 6" of water in the well. At that point the scuppers would be underwater, flaps on them might close them off and if she hadn't settled by more than 6", water would drain from the new ports.

I have to wonder: how many cruisers have had multiple successions of green water on their decks? I realize it's possible, but is it probable? Its possible I bump into Jennifer Anniston tomorrow and she falls in love with my wit and charm. But not probable - not really planning on it (hope Cheryll isn't reading)

Peter

 

[OldDan1943]

"Both vulnerabilities could be remediated fairly economically."
My cockpit has water running in one scupper and out the other when rolling along in a seaway, So the existing scuppers would be worse than useless with the weight of a sea in the cockpit. If one were 5' tall one could raise the entire deck a foot and put in a row of proper, flapped, freeing ports on each side, Short of that, no real way to get rid of water in the well deck b/4 the next sea arrives.
The freeing ports I did install do not and could not come into play with less than 6" of water in the well. At that point the scuppers would be underwater, flaps on them might close them off and if she hadn't settled by more than 6", water would drain from the new ports.

Cockpit too big? No problem. I know a guy who will gladly make the saloon larger and at great expense. I suspect you would be VERY proud of the results. He does all my work "at great expense" too.

 

[rslifkin]

I have to wonder: how many cruisers have had multiple successions of green water on their decks? I realize it's possible, but is it probable? Its possible I bump into Jennifer Anniston tomorrow and she falls in love with my wit and charm. But not probable - not really planning on it (hope Cheryll isn't reading)

Peter

How readily and frequently you'll take green water on the decks will depend on the hull design for the most part. Some boats do a better job of keeping the decks dry than others.

 

[mvweebles]

I don't mean to be flippant, but these threads always come down to the boat. Only because there is someone out there willing to sell to fear.

You want to cross an ocean?

By far, the biggest thing to reduce risk is to learn about weather and historical weather patterns. Total crickets on the subject on forums like these. I wish I knew why.

Assuming you minimize weather risk, what are your biggest exposures?

- Lightening. A direct strike will crash your electronics even if your engine survived.

- Shipboard fire.

- Fuel contamination

- Mechanical failure.

- Prop fouling

- Strike a object of some sort.

Why do we always talk about The Boat? Because we can write a check and don't have to exercise our brain and develop self sufficiency. The impact of The Perfect Storm is high. But the probability is low, and if you don't have to keep a commercial or race schedule, the probability drops very low - sever decimal points low. But yet the stuff to really worry about - lightning, for example, is rarely discussed because it takes deeper knowledge that doesn't occupy the back cover of a magazine and is rarely written about in feature.

Single engines - everyone talks about the world's fishing fleets with single engines as a hallmark of reliability. You know what? Those boats break down all the time. But the people aboard know how to fix them.

This isn't about the boat. This is about seamanship skills and mechanical skills.

Rant done. Apologies upfront.

Peter

 

[mvweebles]

How readily and frequently you'll take green water on the decks will depend on the hull design for the most part. Some boats do a better job of keeping the decks dry than others.

It depends more on where you cruise, how knowledgeable you are about weather (including historical weather), and how married you are to a schedule.

 

[PacificBlue]

The answer begins and ends with the captain , plain and simple.

Crossing the Atlantic in a Grover 26 with outboards, or a 30’ Cutter trailer boat with Volvo stern drives, delivering a 40’ Cheoy Lee from the factory to Florida or heading from Los Angeles to Hawaii, all Ocean going passages.

If the captain does not have what it takes, it ain’t happening.

 

[mvweebles]

The answer begins and ends with the captain , plain and simple.

Crossing the Atlantic in a Grover 26 with outboards, or a 30’ Cutter trailer boat with Volvo stern drives, delivering a 40’ Cheoy Lee from the factory to Florida or heading from Los Angeles to Hawaii, all Ocean going passages.

If the captain does not have what it takes, it ain’t happening.

I agree. Two hypothetical examples. A knowledgeable, experienced, and well prepared owner of an older trawler (say, a KK42 or Willard 40) vs a newbie owner of a N60. Which has the better chance of a successful crossing? I'd put my money on experience and knowledge of the captain vs the raw purchase awe of a boat. The nordhavn is more likely to survive adverse weather conditions, but due to lack of experience is more likely to experience such conditions, and is less likely to know how to respond accordingly to weather and other issues. .

Peter

 

[Datenight]

Peter,

I like the way you think. I have nowhere near the experience you have but have cruised long distances in the Med (with my cousin) where the weather forecasting was amazingly bad in 2015, 16 and 17. We were better off figuring it out on our own which we did.

When we went from the Canaries to Cape Verde December 2019 we had very accurate forecasting. Some heavy wind and seas but we were ready for it.

The crossing from Cape Verde to Barbados was the best weather cruise I have ever been on. Perfect weather every day. We did use a weather router, a friend in Ireland. We also studied the charts and historical patterns well before the trip.

Yes we were ready for heavy weather with a Jordan Drogue but had planned the trip so that it would stay in the laz.

My NP 45 would have easily made that trip if it had the legs.

Not to say we didn't have problems. We did but weather was not on the list. It is my understanding that this is how most well planned passages go.

Rob

 

[squimmy27]

Stability in heavy seas is critically important. All boats are self righting at least up to some limit. After that limit, the boat will roll with disastrous consequences. That limit, called the angle of vanishing stability (or AVS) varies widely based on design factors.

I limited the quote to what my question is...how do you determine AVS? My trawler (Taiwan GB wanna-bee), has had pretty hard lists in the Juan de Fuca straits in 6' swells with winds. She has come through well; it's not like I intend to risk traveling in untoward circumstances, but how would you proactively measure the capabilities of your vessel?

 

[BandB]

I don't mean to be flippant, but these threads always come down to the boat. Only because there is someone out there willing to sell to fear.

You want to cross an ocean?

By far, the biggest thing to reduce risk is to learn about weather and historical weather patterns. Total crickets on the subject on forums like these. I wish I knew why.

Assuming you minimize weather risk, what are your biggest exposures?

- Lightening. A direct strike will crash your electronics even if your engine survived.

- Shipboard fire.

- Fuel contamination

- Mechanical failure.

- Prop fouling

- Strike a object of some sort.

Why do we always talk about The Boat? Because we can write a check and don't have to exercise our brain and develop self sufficiency. The impact of The Perfect Storm is high. But the probability is low, and if you don't have to keep a commercial or race schedule, the probability drops very low - sever decimal points low. But yet the stuff to really worry about - lightning, for example, is rarely discussed because it takes deeper knowledge that doesn't occupy the back cover of a magazine and is rarely written about in feature.

Single engines - everyone talks about the world's fishing fleets with single engines as a hallmark of reliability. You know what? Those boats break down all the time. But the people aboard know how to fix them.

This isn't about the boat. This is about seamanship skills and mechanical skills.

Rant done. Apologies upfront.

Peter

Wifey B: While I agree crossing isn't just about the boat, this thread is. You can't complain about that. The title is "what makes a trawler suitable" not "what makes a captain suitable." People just following the thread title.

 

[Jackhulse]

Stability in heavy seas is critically important. All boats are self righting at least up to some limit. After that limit, the boat will roll with disastrous consequences. That limit, called the angle of vanishing stability (or AVS) varies widely based on design factors. Since the risk of getting caught in high seas is greater when crossing an ocean than when making a coastal hop, a high AVS is much more important if crossing an ocean.

The ability to shed water quickly is also important. During a particularly heavy storm years (and a prior boat -- typical battlewagon sportfisher) ago, following seas repeated broke into the cockpit and filled it 2 feet deep with water. We had the tuna doors open just to allow the water to pour out quickly and (thanks to the self-bailing design) without a drop ending up in the bilge.

I helped sail a Swan 47 from Tortola to Easton, MD, about 1800 miles offshore. The Swan is built for these conditions, and we had no problems, 10 days, and we encountered 30-30 knot winds and 10-15 foot seas. My Endeavour 44 catamaran trawler is NOT built for offshore conditions, and I would never attempt any offshore passage, except crossing ti the Bahamas in good conditions. Unless you are thinking of a Nordhaven or some heavy displacement trawler with stabilizers, I would stay coastal

Jack Hulse

 

[trawlercap]

I would say the Fred Wahl 58' would be very capable of long passages. Not capable of much once you get there with the 13' draft. That definitely helps on ocean crossing though. Boat is 58' x 28'. A lot of boat.

The 58’s are a loophole boat. Govt. regulations allow them to fish in Ak. State waters inside 3 miles. The have gotten so distended on depth and beam to maximize their hold and living/working space. A Search for 32’ Bristol Bay boats shows very similar in extreme proportions to beat a length rule. They are kinda functional but hobbled.

 

[trawlercap]

58’ William Garden passage maker.