I'll acknowledge the elephant in the room...Full keel is dead... ssb is dead...

[gilgsn]

Just as disk brakes have supplanted drum brakes, fin keels have supplanted full keels because because they are better, not because they are cheaper.

The question is, better for what? I am sure they are better for something, like turning on a dime, but not for everything. Another question is, better for who? We don't all have the same requirements... I also chose a full keel mainly for strength. All other considerations come second. This also goes for new vs old designs... Better or worse in what sense? For what application? My boat would probably finish last in a race with newer designs of the same length, but it can probably take the kind of beating that a modern race boat wouldn't. Apples and oranges. You can also define "better" based upon safety, speed, comfort, etc. A full-keel boat is better for certain things, just as a fin-keel boat is better for other things... A full-keel boat is better for me...


Gil.

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by gilgsn

The question is, better for what?

I call into question some of your statements. You're going to need footnotes for some of them. Remember I am a naval architect.

I agree a full keel boat will likely finish last in a race with newer designs. You don't need a footnote there. *grin* Wetted surface and leeway alone contribute to that.

Directional stability is a virtue of full keel. The flip side is close quarters maneuvering is usually poor.

Footnote required on full keels being stronger. Full keels exist because we didn't have the technology to build anything else. Do you find a modern suspension bridge less strong than a truss bridge? Certainly one can design and build a fin keel boat that isn't very strong but that is the result of poor or differently prioritized design, not fundamental to the hull design and keel choice.

Seakeeping of robust fin keels tends to be better than full keel boats. Hull design of course is a major factor but the full keel limits flexibility in that regard. You'll find many more full keel boats that pound in a fully developed offshore sea than fin keels. Stop at one of the major waypoints for transatlantics and look at the crews coming off boats at the same time over the same route and how they look. It is the full keelers who tend to be more haggard in my observation.

Safety is multi-variate. There are a lot of factors that could be single points of failure. In naval architecture we start with the righting moment curve. Fin keels, especially with bulbs and Scheel keels, are more stable than full keels which mean lower risk of rolls and--less significant--downflooding. With respect to keel it is really hard to make a good engineering case for increased safety for full keel boats that doesn't involve raised voices, alcohol, and the absence of math.

Robustness is another matter. I just don't see differences either in engineering or empirical data that full keel boats per se can "take a beating" better than a fin keel boat designed and built for offshore (CE A for example). Footnotes please?

The real benefit of full keel boat is that they tend to be older, overbuilt (which has nothing to do with being full keel), and less expensive than newer boats that tend to be fin keels.

There are design characteristics of full keel boats that are unfortunate. Putting tanks in keels is perennial problem. Add keel stepped masts (common on but not unique to full keel boats) which means wet bilges. There are other common characteristics of design and build that are correlated with time frame and not with keel type.

Let me know if you decide to stop driving over suspension bridges. If you don't trust engineers you might also want to stay out of elevators.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by gilgsn View Post
The question is, better for what?

A good point Gil. It seems to be applicable to many discussions on the forum.

[fatherchronica]

A little over 40 years ago some young guys bought a Morgan Out Island 41 Ketch and decided to sail it to Columbia. They found out there was a race coming up from Florida to Columbia and entered to be able to get weather and route information and to sail for awhile at least with some company. A terrible storm arose, as I recall a late season hurricane, and low and behold they were not only the first to finish but nearly every other boat did not arrive due to dropping out of the race. I read the article in a racing magazine back then. These young guys were not seasoned sailors and to some degree said that they didn’t know any better, but they never were without some sail up. I was surprised when we were cruising how many people we met who had their fin keeled boats delivered or shipped when the going was going to be potentially rough.

[SV Siren]

Originally Posted by Auspicious

I call into question some of your statements. You're going to need footnotes for some of them. Remember I am a naval architect.

Footnote required on full keels being stronger. Full keels exist because we didn't have the technology to build anything else.

Not meaning to cast aspersions, but that statement about not having the technology just simply isn't true. Nathaniel Herreshoff in his 1891 design Dilemma, had a fin keel.


He also designed Jubilee, and Pilgrim, both America's Cup defenders in 1893, and both of them fin keel designs. These are just a few of his designs from that period. Fin keels just didn't become favorable, despite their performance.

This just to name a few..

I am no naval architect, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last week..

A good read on the history of naval architecture in America's Cup design:

Chevalier Taglang: AMERICA'S CUP - HISTORY OF YACHT DESIGNS - TWIN-KEEL - YACHT DESIGN INNOVATION - FIN-KEEL - BALLAST

[TeddyDiver]

My comments

Originally Posted by nematon785

Just thought I'd whack the hornets nest with a broom here.
You're welcome
Full keels are not dying out, they are dead. broaching in big waves, nd swamped cockpits, so heavy you need a turbo on the big diesel, bow sprits closing on 10 feet long, and the lee way OMG, trying to park or drive in reverse don't even bother
Not full kell but long, half the length of the boat, no turbo, bow sprit well over 10'. And this is a new build
SSB installation at $6000 plus ya gotta have the whatever mail program and a computer to decipher morse code into weather maps, complexity, confusion, waiting to connect to the source, sunspots, and huge power consumption. A satellite solution is so quick, simple, easy, and cheaper.
Concur!
Luke anchors that are effective are so heavy a literal crane aboard is needed to drag it out of the bilge, mantis or rocna on a chain is the latest thang.
I think
Hard dinghy with oars? Cmon! no body uses this ancient stuff anymore. 30+ horsepower and a RIB gets us there in style well dressed not blown out to sea, capsized, sunk or paddling around against the current for hours.
Defineatly a hard dink, oars and a sail, might get an electric OB someday..
tan barked canvas sails, tarred hemp lines, blocks a plenty to increase purchase vs a big ol electric winch and full battened laminate wings. guess who gets to port quicker, and who weathers the storm from plodding along at snail pace?
I think the idea is to enjoy the sea. For those in a hurry wings are faster..
Paper charts? as a place mat maybe.

A mono hull? ya gotta be kidding. old news. cats are all that counts anymore.
What you said about the parking? There's no places to park one in most places
A windvane? are you serious?! with modern wind aware below deck autopilots connected to the nmea networked chartplotter why even throw away the money on such an antique?
Windvane of course, a double actually
A boat of any kind under 40 feet? only lunatics would make any passage over 50 miles from shore or 10 hours on such a dangerous vessel
Joking, right..
Catching rain is so 1970. do you use a tye dye tarp for that? time to get with the water making program. nice water jugs strapped to your stays and shrouds. looks quaint.
My decks are desingned to collect rain, no tarps needed
rice and beans? no. refrigeration yes.
and jerky, salted pork and a lot of rhum
It all flows the way of the loran and the sextant.
No self respecting Viking is willing to take the risk of being seen to use such modern devices. Glass and compass will suffice
Yeah, I'm being a bit of a smart a$$.

Spoiled brat..

[gilgsn]

The real benefit of full keel boat is that they tend to be older, overbuilt (which has nothing to do with being full keel), and less expensive than newer boats that tend to be fin keels.

I think you hit the nail on the head with this statement...

As to $6K SSB radio installations, you can do the same thing with a $600 HAM radio setup...

Gil.

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by SV Siren

Not meaning to cast aspersions, but that statement about not having the technology just simply isn't true. Nathaniel Herreshoff in his 1891 design Dilemma, had a fin keel.

No aspersions taken. Mr. Herreshoff was a visionary who had the skills and drive and management ability to breath life into his visions. You'll find the expense of building some of his early boats was quite high and not suitable for production on any reasonable scale. Some of the early implementations were fragile.

Materials science (fiberglass, stainless steel), strength of materials (especially finite element analysis), hydrodynamics (foil shape in particular), and pure math (chaos theory applied to fluid flow) have made many things once beyond our grasp quite achievable, even to backyard builders working from the designs of others.

It took half a century or more for production to catch up with Mr. Herreshoff.

[TeddyDiver]

Originally Posted by Auspicious

No aspersions taken. Mr. Herreshoff was a visionary who had the skills and drive and management ability to breath life into his visions. You'll find the expense of building some of his early boats was quite high and not suitable for production on any reasonable scale. Some of the early implementations were fragile.

Materials science (fiberglass, stainless steel), strength of materials (especially finite element analysis), hydrodynamics (foil shape in particular), and pure math (chaos theory applied to fluid flow) have made many things once beyond our grasp quite achievable, even to backyard builders working from the designs of others.

It took half a century or more for production to catch up with Mr. Herreshoff.

It was the racing rules making fin keels obsolete in that time. Remember those were high end racers designed and built for blokes with plenty of dough, so production costs were not an issue. Besides bronze bolts and steel girders were already available..

[SV Siren]

Quite correct in your statement concerning racing rules making fin keels obsolete in that time.

For those of you who are good old boat magazine readers, roughly a year or so ago they published a story discussing somewhat of a history in design, along with some notable firsts and standouts.

[DanielPerry]

If any of the things that you say have replaced (outdated; obsoleted) fail, then you are where? Really though, that's a very realistic and sobering scenario to consider!

The full-keeler will allow you to sleep hove to, not smash with a bump of ground, right herself (you want to be even a mere two miles from shore when your cat rolls over? HA!) The helm will balance very reliably once you learn the boat's character which will take less of your energy to manage if you have to.
If her skipper HAD to duck in she'd take the beating and stay hove to, and theoretically (and practically) come back UP if rolled.

It's an artifact whose character was built from the self reliant. The character of the boat is self reliance. In harmony and observance of nature. Not this "smash through on an exact fast course to safety", attitude but stay out and fish for a while, exposed.

My point is, really, that this type of boat is probably owned by people (obviously like me hehe) who appreciate that time where there wasnt this myriad of support systems, but your intuition, skills and the boat's ability to weather the unknown.

Apollo 13 crew lost it all... it could happen on a boat. It certainly has, right? And what did they rely on? Hmm? SLIDE RULE.
Using the verbage "replaced" is somewhat naive (Im not trying to be disrespectful to you) but it only makes the fragile fast boat safe when the technology works. You know what they say about complex machines: their likelihood of failure is an exponential function to its complexity.
These old boats came from that time, where there was only the smarts and the analog tools. Yes that meant getting into some now avoidable scenarios but it also meant being able to weather it. See? Different animals they are.

I will say, I bet that if you experienced a ****-storm of failures and then ended up blind in bad weather you might be wishing you were on a solid old boat with the old salts who match, where you could ride it out instead of pitchpoling your Cat at 25 kts in effot to escape because you knew the Cat wasnt meant for survival, or "12 hours with "mike tyson".

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by DanielPerry

The full-keeler will allow you to sleep hove to, not smash with a bump of ground, right herself

Why on Earth do you think heaving to is limited to full keel boats? I've hove to on any number of fin keelers doing insurance sign-offs for new owners.

Originally Posted by DanielPerry

It's an artifact whose character was built from the self reliant. The character of the boat is self reliance. In harmony and observance of nature. Not this "smash through on an exact fast course to safety", attitude but stay out and fish for a while, exposed.

I've experienced at least as much smashing and pounding on full keel boats as fin keels. More pounding perhaps and slower less comfortable passages on full keel boats.

[DanielPerry]

Originally Posted by Auspicious

Why on Earth do you think heaving to is limited to full keel boats? I've hove to on any number of fin keelers doing insurance sign-offs for new owners.



I've experienced at least as much smashing and pounding on full keel boats as fin keels. More pounding perhaps and slower less comfortable passages on full keel boats.

I have heard that full keelers pound more, I wouldnt say Ive experienced enough of either to really say with conviction, but I do know full keelers drift less when hove to and feel secure. Perhaps a mental security that is a subjective one. The post by the naval architect and was very interested in what he had to say about stability. I guess my real criticism here was I'd feel much much safer in a heavily keeled monohull than a catamaran, and I would wager that it would indeed be safer. I'm thinking of a dead tired, hypothermic sailor who needs to heave to quickly. Ive been there once (thank goodness I wasnt way way offshore) and I was very happy to know I could hunker down. I honestly wouldnt feel that way on a Cat.

[Auspicious]

Originally Posted by DanielPerry

I have heard that full keelers pound more, I wouldnt say Ive experienced enough of either to really say with conviction, but I do know full keelers drift less when hove to and feel secure. Perhaps a mental security that is a subjective one. The post by the naval architect and was very interested in what he had to say about stability. I guess my real criticism here was I'd feel much much safer in a heavily keeled monohull than a catamaran, and I would wager that it would indeed be safer. I'm thinking of a dead tired, hypothermic sailor who needs to heave to quickly. Ive been there once (thank goodness I wasnt way way offshore) and I was very happy to know I could hunker down. I honestly wouldnt feel that way on a Cat.

In my experience full-bodied boats, consistent with full keels but including shorter keeled boats like a Passport 40 pound. Again - people attribute characteristics to the keel that aren't necessarily associated. Correlation does not mean causation.

Catamarans can heave to also. In that community it is often called "parking."

There are variations here that importantly include whether you are making a bit of way to windward or making leeway.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by DanielPerry

I have heard that full keelers pound more, I wouldnt say Ive experienced enough of either to really say with conviction, but I do know full keelers drift less when hove to and feel secure. Perhaps a mental security that is a subjective one. The post by the naval architect and was very interested in what he had to say about stability. I guess my real criticism here was I'd feel much much safer in a heavily keeled monohull than a catamaran, and I would wager that it would indeed be safer. I'm thinking of a dead tired, hypothermic sailor who needs to heave to quickly. Ive been there once (thank goodness I wasnt way way offshore) and I was very happy to know I could hunker down. I honestly wouldnt feel that way on a Cat.

Full keelers generally pound less because they have deeper hull shapes forward while most fin keel boats have flatter hull sections forward (I can say I've experienced enough of both to really say that with conviction).

HOWEVER,

1. Due to the weight, particularly the weight in the ends, and the hull shape, the full keelboat will drive into the wave and bury its bow rather than ride up and over the wave. There is definitely a difference in motion going into waves. And driving the bow deep into the wave is slower; it slows the boat down to do that. One must decide which motion and the consequences of it, that they prefer. I prefer to ride up and over the waves and keep going than nearly stop with each big wave.

2. Pounding while sailing upwind is more often caused by the side of the forward part of the hull hitting the waves not the bottom of the hull because the boat is heeled over, not upright. Racing boats delaminate the hulls on the sides of the bow, not the bottom. If one was to sail a full keeled boat upwind it too would be heeled over and the side of the bow would impact the wave and that would be "pounding". If both types are motoring, then the fin keel boat will be pounding more than the full keel boat (see point 1) but it will also be making more progress.

3. Let's talk about directional stability and "broaching". A full keelboat has a longer, straight, keel which we can assume tends to go in a straight line. But in big waves, such as a following sea, both types of boats are in a moving area of water bigger than the boat itself and sailing towards a curved section of water (the trough). Both boats will pick up speed coming down the face toward the trough. Both boats will then encounter the trough and slow down while the wave continues to push the stern. This results in a turn. Maybe the full keel resists that turn more, but it is not going to be enough in many cases.

In those cases, to prevent a broach one needs good steering control and a powerful rudder. Your autopilot, helmsman or windvane will try to correct the turn caused by the wave and the fin keel boat with a detached rudder is going to be much more responsive to steering inputs The distance between the keel and the rudder give much more leverage.

If the following waves are small the full keel boat may go straighter, but in big following waves, potential broach causing waves, where the boat is sailing on a curved section of water, good steering response beats trying to sail straight .

Photo: When these waves come your boat needs to be responsive to steering inputs. We sailed for hours in this stuff off of Cabo de Vela in Columbia, with the monitor steering, and no broaching issues.