Difference Between Coastal And Blue Water Cruising

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Jon Eisberg

Yeah, you've nailed it, alright... Nothing but a bunch of wankers over there, for sure...

Exhibit A, check out the pics posted recently by this poseur, for instance...














This couple 'cruised' the Chilean canals and Patagonia without an engine... I mean, Seriously ??? What the hell could anyone sailing without an engine possibly know about REAL Kroozing, after all?

So, you grabbed this kroozer's pics from Cruising Anarchy? There's exceptions to rules, but rarely over there. In this case, clearly coastal cruising by a sailor with exceptional skills and experience. But, how many would recommend, let alone undertake coastal cruising enginless? Especially in an environment with mountains like you see in the photos that can affect wind direction and strength in unpredictable ways. You can look at this two ways, either the sailor is the bloke I described above, or clearly in his element over there among the misfits and crazies.

An, aye. I be one of 'em. Go there when I need a good dust up.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

That is sure a strong statement! I think those two have forgotten more than most of us knew in the first place. I'm not sure what those bits and pieces would be but I would sure be interested in knowing!! I'd take the modern boat as well by the way.

I never said they didn't have a great deal of ability but Magellan probably forgot more than the Pardeys know. Doesn't mean much of it is relevant to your average modern cruiser.

I'd rather get those bits and pieces from a more up to date source where most of the information provided is relevant rather than sorting thru heaps of info for a small pearl of wisdom that may be relavent. Of course, if I don't know which pearls are relavent, I'm probably going to overlook the best pearls, they have to share.

Sounds like the mythos they've built and your common sense are in conflict. You want to believe they have some special knowledge they can impart upon you but your common sense controls in the end (ie: you are going with a modern boat also).

I don't have any ill will towards them and I occassionally read thier stories as they can be interesting but I don't consider them a how to source for cruising information.

[Jon Eisberg]

Originally Posted by Wrong

So, you grabbed this kroozer's pics from Cruising Anarchy? There's exceptions to rules, but rarely over there. In this case, clearly coastal cruising by a sailor with exceptional skills and experience.

"Coastal cruising", huh? Yeah, I suppose you're right, there's little really little difference between a trip down the ICW, and the passage thru the Canales from Puerto Montt to the Beagle Channel... Both of roughly equivalent length, primarily in 'protected' waterways, after all. Probably the only real difference is the fact that during the entire course of the latter route, one might not even need all the fingers on one hand to count the number of places to be able to obtain diesel fuel... :-)

Probably just me, but when I think of what most folks consider to be an example of "Coastal Cruising", the Chilean canals, the Beagle Channel, the Strait of Magellan, and this neighborhood in general is not the first one that comes to mind... :-)





Not to mention, the 52-day passage direct from Panama it took those folks to make it down to Valdivia and thence to Mile 0 of Chile's ICW, or the passage out to the Falklands, and then up to Uruguay... I doubt that involved too much in the way of coastal cruising, either...

Originally Posted by Wrong

But, how many would recommend, let alone undertake coastal cruising enginless? Especially in an environment with mountains like you see in the photos that can affect wind direction and strength in unpredictable ways. You can look at this two ways, either the sailor is the bloke I described above, or clearly in his element over there among the misfits and crazies.

Well, I'm gonna go with the notion that this couple are pretty competent sailors, knew what they were getting into and relished the challenge, and pulled it off in exemplary fashion...

Thoughts on engineless sailing - Cruising Anarchy - Sailing Anarchy Forums

[Jammer Six]

Originally Posted by Hudson Force

I don't cruise in the Pacific Northwest, so maybe I'm missing something. Are you saying that you can not depend upon a three day forecast without a major storm system?

I'm saying that the three day forecast is never accurate for Puget Sound.

Puget Sound is, relatively speaking, a sheltered, placid environment as far as large ships are concerned. Once a container ship has made Puget Sound, they're safe. Puget Sound is where they come for shelter.

For that very reason, 3 day forecasts are accurate up to and some ways into the Straits, and Puget Sound is, at best, on the very edge of those forecast.

The times, strengths, directions and everything else of weather systems are never accurate for Puget Sound.

So I guess that makes us blue water.

[El Pinguino]

Originally Posted by Wrong

You can look at this two ways, either the sailor is the bloke I described above, or clearly in his element over there among the misfits and crazies.

That's new, I've never been called a misfit and crazy before....

It truly is a shithole of a cruising ground... best all you people stay away.....

and, btw, yes...that's a Catalina 28.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

Doesn't the difference between coastal and blue water cruising really just come down to which internet forum you read?

[Rustic Charm]

In this part of the world, way down south, 'coastal' is in sight of the coast. Beyond sight of land is considered 'off shore'. I honestly can't see much difference in adding an extra of 'blue water'.

And, yes there is some real challenges and 'abilities' in going 'off shore', for ten days or more, but frankly, it's still 'off shore'.

There are also some real challenges of long term 'coastal' and those sailers have some real abilities too.

[weavis]

Provisioning.

That is the difference. My boat to the best of my ability is set up for sailing in rough water.

I dont carry a lot of spares that I would if going a long distance and I dont carry a lot of extra food or water. Im just a short distance from Pubs and food everywhere.....

The rest is the same. Emergency equipment, medical supplies, secure hatches, clean fuel, suite of sails, over sized rigging, Radios, GPS, EPIRB. full survey and everything checked, tightened and renewed.

Now its only a 'coastal cruiser' but in the setting up I choose to make it seaworthy. NOT that I intend to go bluewater in it. I just figure I want to be safe on the sea ANYWHERE if possible. These boats have sailed all over the world. I dont want to add to the number who have done it, I just want to be ready if forced into it.......

A person can drown in an inch of water you know!

[FamilyVan]

I think out of site of land might be stretching the definition of offshore a little. That would mean I was offshore if I was bombing across lake Ontario from Niagara on the Lake to Toronto. You can do that on most summer days in an 18' bass boat.

While you do occasionally encounter dirty weather on the great lakes (some times very dirty), it's more the exception than the rule.

I can confidently say there's no offshore sailing between Duluth and Baie-Comeau.


Sent from my SGH-I547C using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by FamilyVan

I think out of site of land might be stretching the definition of offshore a little. That would mean I was offshore if I was bombing across lake Ontario from Niagara on the Lake to Toronto. You can do that on most summer days in an 18' bass boat.

While you do occasionally encounter dirty weather on the great lakes (some times very dirty), it's more the exception than the rule.

I can confidently say there's no offshore sailing between Duluth and Baie-Comeau.


Sent from my SGH-I547C using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

I think that's being a little pedantic linking it to one particular lake. The whole point is there is no definition. So I was relating to what our local authorities recommend for safety items to be carried. 'off shore' is beyond site of land. Most considerations seemed to be linked more to safety and weather related considerations than anything else.

[FamilyVan]

Originally Posted by Rustic Charm

I think that's being a little pedantic linking it to one particular lake. The whole point is there is no definition. So I was relating to what our local authorities recommend for safety items to be carried. 'off shore' is beyond site of land. Most considerations seemed to be linked more to safety and weather related considerations than anything else.

I see your point. But, througout the world small open boats fish safely beyond the sight of land.

I agree that the definition is lose and means different things to different people. But if your average redneck is comfortable with a 6 pack, fishing rod, boom box and bass boat- I just wouldn't really consider it to be off shore or blue water. Personally.

I think the above points to isolation, the need for large tank capacity, food stores, redundant systems etc speak better to what is commonly understood to be blue water capability.

The term "sea keeping" ability comes to mind.

Sent from my SGH-I547C using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Hudson Force]

Originally Posted by Jammer Six

I'm saying that the three day forecast is never accurate for Puget Sound.

Puget Sound is, relatively speaking, a sheltered, placid environment as far as large ships are concerned. Once a container ship has made Puget Sound, they're safe. Puget Sound is where they come for shelter.

For that very reason, 3 day forecasts are accurate up to and some ways into the Straits, and Puget Sound is, at best, on the very edge of those forecast.

The times, strengths, directions and everything else of weather systems are never accurate for Puget Sound.

So I guess that makes us blue water.

Ok, now I understand. It's all a matter of mis-communication that started back in my post #5. When I spoke of "my passages" and the three day window I was speaking of the open ocean and not protected waters like you describe.

Please feel free to call your passages in Puget Sound as "blue water" because there is no actual operational definition, but my reference was to areas exposed to the full fetch of the open expanse of unsheltered water.

[Scout 30]

I found this list of "Blue Water Boats" & thought it might be pertinent. I'm not sure I'd include all of them but it's interesting. Full List of Sailboats

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by FamilyVan

I see your point. But, througout the world small open boats fish safely beyond the sight of land.

I agree that the definition is lose and means different things to different people. But if your average redneck is comfortable with a 6 pack, fishing rod, boom box and bass boat- I just wouldn't really consider it to be off shore or blue water. Personally.

I think the above points to isolation, the need for large tank capacity, food stores, redundant systems etc speak better to what is commonly understood to be blue water capability.

The term "sea keeping" ability comes to mind.

Sent from my SGH-I547C using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[Mirage Gecko]

A couple of lifetimes ago when living in Townsville we used to fish the reefs 50 to 70 nautical miles Offshore.Always at least two boats together but mostly three and smallest one was 21 Ft half cab and all well set up for what we did with them.Also pretty fussy with the weather forecasts.
Can't remember what reef it actually was but woke up one morning and here is a guy fishing alone in a 14 Ft tinny I was thinking he was from another bigger boat but turns out he was alone and from the same port as us.
Not much other than Bluewater out wide from where we went no mainland in sight and at the time I considered we were way offshore but the guy in the tinny obviously not thinking the same.
So maybe the terminologies are more apptly applied to the individuals perception.
Chris