Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippocampus
We transitioned due to wife being unsafe on the foredeck.
Boat was on the hard in Grenada. I was sick and to fly out the next day. Asked her to check water tanks were drained. She fell 11’ from top of the ladder and broke her ankle in three places. Now healed but her balance is just enough off as to be unsafe on passage. I remain in love with oceanic passage making but love my wife more. So the only new boat I ever spec’d and built (Outbound46) was sold. Now on a Nordic tug 42. After 8 years going New England to leewards our plan was the azores then Med. That dream is over. New dream starts. As they say a man who has known the ocean is ruin for land. Loved the deep water now will love the skinny water as well.
Respectfully disagree about weather. In a proper boat and a experienced crew weather is part of package. You hear different estimates and numbers have shifted for the better with improved weather routing. Still, about 80% is below fresh breeze and majority of 8 and above is brief (line squalls, t storms and the like.) The problem is storm force for days. Even then with a proper vessel you deploy the jsd, button up, lay on the sole and wait for it to go by. In 35 + years I been in one storm. Multiple gales but only one storm. Think for most recreational blue water sailors that’s about average. Issue you see now is 2 footitis is a thing of the past. In the past people would do regional coastal, then long jump near shore . Then a brief ocean race or two like Marion Bermuda or Halifax. Then passages. First as crew . Then as captain. So they would have seen gradiually worse and worse conditions. This would be in the company of more experienced people. The fear of the unknown would be conquered.
Now people work their butts off and go buy the biggest baddest boat they can. Maybe they’ve been doing regional coastal for decades but they have no experience of sustained serious weather. Fear is paralyzing. Poor preparation occurs. Bad decisions are made. Was part of Salty Dawg fleet that was caught out. Many boats requested and received outside assistance. Many turned back. Many were damaged. But many had an uneventful sail. Got to know this group fairly well. Those who had an uneventful sail had one thing in common from what I could tell. All went through the 2’itis. The gradual transition as crew and captain to further horizons. If that’s your goal crew for others then captain that transit. As captain learn from your crew. Never stop learning. Don’t think motor or sail makes much difference except fewer blue water recreational motor is made in mom and pop sizes. No issue taking a 28’ Bristol Channel cutter or a Westsail round the clock or 40’ Nordie. See 80’ motor I wouldn’t take out of sight of land. But as voyaging under power has proven there’s no real obstacle to a mom and pop doing blue water and experiencing serious weather. The problem isn’t the boat v crew. The problem is the crew hasn’t put in the dedication and prep work to be able to work the boat to its capabilities. That takes time and the gradual accumulation of experience. Not taught in a course nor a book.
Still, totally agree with Peter. It’s much more difficult to produce a BWB motor vessel at a reasonable price point than sailboat. All the things that improve quality of life in power over sail are likely detrimental to a seaworthy ocean boat. Those wide open spaces makes moving around hazardous. Those wonderful views from inside increase down flooding risks. Designing to move above hull speed makes getting to an acceptable AVS problematic. Don’t accept the EU rating system as a measure. That only applies for the moment the vessel first splashes. Any cruising boat will get worked hard and age over time . All to often have seen A rated vessels at build come nowhere close to being a BWB after as short as a year or two. Realize when first set up provisions concerning durability were curtailed. The many production boat builders had their say. View that system as the floor. Next question is how does that vessel hold up with actual use. Have more trust in Norse, Lloyds and ABYC than anything EU says.
There’s a reason N,KK and others have their rep. Stick built and strong even after being cruised extensively if maintained. Like Peter think I’m on a good boat. But there’s no question in my mind it’s not a BWB so won’t be used as such.
|
Hi,
Nordic tug launch in the EU market in 2007 had to apply for CE certification, with a small change in defoster height, it was able to meet the CE-B class.
in addition, this determines the safe loading of the boat by people and the weight of the cargo. this is good information for me because it increases safety when I follow the instructions. The CE certificate is not a bad thing in the boat, check out the link where Nordic tells you about it.
NBs
http://www.glantoa.net/nordic_tugs_stability.pdf
The Nordic Tug 37 is an incredibly economical cruise. Diesel costs a lot here and matters even more than you do in the US. a gallon of diesel today costs $ 6.95 ... My average consumption is 5 nm / gallon, at a speed of about 6 knots which is the optimum speed / consumption. Sure i can drive faster and pay extra ... the engine has cummins qsb 380hp and it works just fine with a small load, i have confirmed ssian cummins from the factory.
it seems that diesel prices will rise sharply here as the policy drives CO2 reduction from the climate, and Finland aims to be the first carbon neutral country in the world by 2035.
Linear Mode
