Thoughts on Liveaboards for Atlantic Crossing

[Eleuthera 2014]

Canada heh? Look at Corbin 39's. Pilot House Cutter is the best config apparently.

GL

[GulfportBarb]

We have a 2000 Beneteau 461 with 2 cabins, 2 heads, 2 solar panels, 2 wind turbines in excellent condition. The mahogany interior is in excellent condition. We are getting ready to paint the top sides, new mainsail and reconditioned Genoa in 2015. Can be cutter rigged. Yanmar 75 hp engine with 2000 hours. Older electronics but works. I would add an updated chart plotter with AIS to supplement radar. Just cruised 700 miles from St. Pete to Cuba and back, she is very fast and comfortable onboard. PM if interested.

[viben]

Originally Posted by barnakiel

On the criteria, I would look for at least the following:
- good design,
- well built,
- ability to make you dream of sailing away,
- sail well (if a sailing boat),
- motor reasonably,
- no issues (if buying s/h),
- well matched with your personality, your skills and your sailing plans.

Have fun dreaming and shopping, learning, then sailing,
b.

Most of boats I have sailed have been 30-40', which is probably the main reason why I believe something bigger may be more comfortable for liveaboard.

I agree that "good design", "well built", "sail well" and "motor reasonably" are essential. The challenge for someone like me is that there does not seem to any consensus on these issues - or it it just me that is confused trying to make sense of all the information out there?

[Juho]

You did not mention money as a key criterion. If that's the case, then I recommend any of the most valued cruising brands. That way you can combine safety and comfort. Those boats are not racing oriented boats (they are cruising oriented), but they may still meet your "sail well" criterion. On the old continent something like Hallberg-Rassy, Amel, Nauticat (their pilot house models) (I may have some personal bias here). There are corresponding trusted cruising brands made in the new continent too, but I leave it to others to name them.

I think your problem can be solved quite easily if your budget is large enough. But if your budget is constrained, then you need to decide which properties will go first (seaworthiness, size, age,...).

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by viben

Most of boats I have sailed have been 30-40', which is probably the main reason why I believe something bigger may be more comfortable for liveaboard.

I agree that "good design", "well built", "sail well" and "motor reasonably" are essential. The challenge for someone like me is that there does not seem to any consensus on these issues - or it it just me that is confused trying to make sense of all the information out there?

Length is only one dimension of space. Beam and layout may be far more important, if often overlooked, factors. For a good liveaboard you may elect space and layout over length ... Off course, only when you are likely to make any concessions.

Anyways, we only need about 4 ft^2 seated and 14 ft^2 when stretched, so what are you going to do with all the extra space? ;-) You are right about bigger is better but beware this human drive for bigger and bigger may have you overlook some potentially roomier, smaller boats!

I missed your point where you talk about lack of consensus. Well designed implies designed in accordance with a fixed set of proven design formulas (keel low, hull in between and the mast on top, NOT the other way round). A well designed home is safe, functional and in many cases may be a joy to the onlookers eye. Well built implies the builders were professionals, the materials were of good quality and the ideas of the designer got properly employed in the build. Sailing well implies the boat is capable of making good progress in the desired direction, in the expected conditions and with due respect for the delicate human factor being carried within. Motoring well implies getting close to hull speed at full throttle and preferably upwards of 1 sqrt (lwl) at half throttle. So, unless one is very eclectic in their choice of definitions, there is not too much to discuss when we want a well designed and built, well sailing and adequately motoring boat.

If there is any room for lack of consensus, I would discuss aesthetics. ;-) But I want a sea funeral, and none is given to ones killed by members of an Internet forum ... ;-)

b.

[TheThunderbird]

Comfort and seaworthiness mean a slow-motion boat, which to me speaks of draft, ballast, high displacement. A boat nailing into the seas, well equipped, simple

All these are quite forlorn qualities, since they come at a cost, and don't help sales...

Therefore, I'd look for old designs from the 80s, say Wauquiez,Baltic, Najad, H-R (by Frers only) as good examples, and Jeanneau Sun Legend 41' (Peterson) and Sun Kiss 44/47' as good prospect.

Buy a SECOND AUTOPILOT, bimini, solar panels, chained anchor,and go

[carstenb]

somewhere you mentioned $150k. this will buy you a boat, but at that price you'll almost certainly have to spend som cash upgrading it for true blue water, either the electronics will be ancient or the sails will be.

you may get lucky, but i'd expect to spend anohter $30-40k to upgrade something in that price range (assuming mid 40's length).

One thing you should be cognizant of - everyone talks about blue water passage as the defining issue. On an atlantic loop or sailing over from the US and spending a year in the Med, the passage time in total will be something like 6-8 weeks. The rest of the year (or more) will be coastal sailing. So you might think aobut buying a boat that will be very corfortable for coastal sailing and live with a bit of discomfort on passages since they are such a minut portionn of the trip.

[chuckr]

We have been full time liveabaord for the last 8+ years and did a 2 person atlantic crossing in '13. We sail a Jeanneau DS40 and love her. We would not want anything smaller but I would like maybe 2-4' more - Admiral is of different opinion - she likes the current size.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by TheThunderbird

Comfort and seaworthiness mean a slow-motion boat, which to me speaks of draft, ballast, high displacement. A boat nailing into the seas, well equipped, simple

All these are quite forlorn qualities, since they come at a cost, and don't help sales...

Therefore, I'd look for old designs from the 80s, say Wauquiez,Baltic, Najad, H-R (by Frers only) as good examples, and Jeanneau Sun Legend 41' (Peterson) and Sun Kiss 44/47' as good prospect.

Buy a SECOND AUTOPILOT, bimini, solar panels, chained anchor,and go

I think you are right on comfort but seaworthiness can be also found in some fast motion boats (think of IMOCA, Class 40, Mini, etc.). Still, even the seaworthy quick motion boats have as you pointed out - plenty of ballast, very deep draft, etc.

Some apparently well proven old designs are not in fact too seaworthy at all - read on adventures of Tsu Hang and similar designs. She got wiped out twice and nearly lost in the process.

b.

[TheThunderbird]

IMOCA60 is a 600k USD example, I fear
Other racing boats can be made unsinkable by using foam all around, but are of little comfort.

Tsu Hang capsized and was lost in the Aegean...as a proof that after crossing the Indian ocean even the Med can be dangerous.

Boats of that era had little buoyancy on their stern sections... thus waves broke and flushed them better than pushing 'em up

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by TheThunderbird

IMOCA60 is a 600k USD example, I fear
Other racing boats can be made unsinkable by using foam all around, but are of little comfort.

Tsu Hang capsized and was lost in the Aegean...as a proof that after crossing the Indian ocean even the Med can be dangerous.

Boats of that era had little buoyancy on their stern sections... thus waves broke and flushed them better than pushing 'em up

Thundie,

My example was not for the budget range but of seaworthiness in quick motion boats! I think the figure you mention is ... a huge understatement. A newer, not beaten up one, will cost ... $$$ ;-)

The part on Tsu Hang and her Med capsize is 100% new to me - thx for this tip, I will read up. Most interesting!

Likely, the OP will sail something in between an IMOCA and Tsu Hang ...!

Cheers,
b.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by TheThunderbird

Tsu Hang capsized and was lost in the Aegean...as a proof that after crossing the Indian ocean even the Med can be dangerous.

Wiki: "" ... The Smeetons sold Tzu Hang to a friend, Bob Nance, and moved to Alberta, Canada. She is reported to have become used for smuggling marijuana and was impounded in 1988 by US Customs Agents, and destroyed with a bulldozer in 1990...."

Ha!

Do you remember where you read about her Med end?

b.

[TheThunderbird]

Yachting Monthly’s coverage of the 50th anniversary of Miles and Beryl Smeeton’s double capsize in the H S ‘Uncle’ Rouse-designed Tzu Hang, their 46ft ketch, in the January issue, sparked some happy memories from readers.

Yachtswoman Susan Elliot remembers sailing in the yacht as a young girl with her father Col. Denis Swinburne who had her built in Hong Kong and shipped to the UK in 1939 where she was laid up at Burnham-on-Crouch in Essex during World War II. After the war he cruised her to Northern Ireland and the West Coast of Scotland. Col. Swinburne later sold her to the Smeetons in 1951. They were to make her famous after their book, Once is Enough, was published about their two capsizes in the Southern Ocean


Read more at Once is more than enough – Yachting Monthly

My memories come after the A.Coles' book, I'm happy they didn't sink, but they were flat down in the Aegean, coming from HK.

[naitaka322]

Odays are rare in Canada but great boats. There are a couple in the Toronto area. A Niagara 35 is a good choice. Contessa 32's were built in Canada as well. CC Landfall 35 or 38 have done some serious cruising. Boats are cheap in Canada at the moment as opposed to the US where you will be paying a 40 % bonus on the currency. Thoughts from a fellow Canuck.

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by TheThunderbird

IMOCA60 is a 600k USD example, I fear
Other racing boats can be made unsinkable by using foam all around, but are of little comfort.

Tsu Hang capsized and was lost in the Aegean...as a proof that after crossing the Indian ocean even the Med can be dangerous.

Boats of that era had little buoyancy on their stern sections... thus waves broke and flushed them better than pushing 'em up

There were as many different designs in the era of Tsu Hang as in later years. The only boats that one might categorically say had little buyancy on the stern sections might (might) be ones built to a racing rule -- with long overhanging bow and aft deck/stern high above the water. That would NOT be the case of cruising boats of the day. Tsu Hang was a double-ender so had a bit less buoyancy than perhaps a hull with transom but was by no means as narrow of stern as many other double enders.

Tsu Hang was thought to be incredibly sea-worthy. In her Once is Enough story, she was first pitch-poled in huge seas in the roaring 40's near Cape Horn and able to be repaired at sea by the 3 people aboard and then and limp to port for a re-rigging and the second time she rolled near the same spot in the roaring 40's and was able to again limp into port with her two person crew. There's a movie taken by John Guzzwell (of Trekka fame) who was aboard during the first attempt of Cape Horn. I would say the boat was quite seaworthy at the time, given all that she went through successfully. ITN Reporting 67: Cape Horn: Sailing Round the Horn

She was a wood boat, of course, and later in life may have been much less seaworthy than when sailed by the Smeetons. The seaworthiness of a wooden boat in particular comes and goes--with fastening, refastening and care of the hull and rig--the same boat may be more or less ready for a bluewater crossing over the years. Not so much age-related but more so related to how long it's been since the last major rebuild/refastening/replanking/re-decking...all things that create the structural integrity needed for a bluewater boat.