What EXACTLY is a "blue water boat"?

[Superjunkman]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Such feigned moral superiority and snap judgment aren’t things to eagerly display.

It wasn’t feigned. A good rule of thumb is how insurable you are in a maritime environment. The folks that indemnify marine activities and vessels know what’s what. I don’t have to bring my feelings into it.

[Superjunkman]

Originally Posted by danstanford

How about the Ultime trimarans who have just circumnavigated again. Some of these boats and all of these skippers are as experienced as you can get at bluewater and I would guess that they are all re-defining what their boats should be durability wise again.

I think a seaworthy “Bluewater” vessel should make getting across an large boisterous body of water and staying away unsupported easier not more challenging. These racing skippers are knowingly taking risks to win races. They’re ok with that. The average sailer would be hanging onto a capsized hull with that tri.

[MicHughV]

A lot of people aspire to sail around the world, etc, but may not necessarily have the coin to buy the "perfect" boat, and must therefore find the boat that suits their wallet.

The lack of funds does not stop them from going however, and in my travels I've come across countless skippers and their respective boats of every kind of size and design.

One only needs to look at rtw trips by Robin Lee Graham, Tania Aebi, Matt Rutherford's around America's voyage, and many others, etc. These were all accomplished in relatively small and inexpensive run-of-the-mill fiberglass sloops, a testament to their pluck as much as the capability of their respective craft.

Would these have been considered " blue water" boats as opined by this thread, no, probably not, but that did not make them any less capable of accomplishing "blue water" voyages...

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by Wandering1

I guess it means different things to different people.
For me it means having enough fuel for 1000nm,
Not ever needing to carry fuel cans or water cans on deck.
Having a secure cockpit that provides weather protection.
Having a water tight crash bulkhead.
Having an encapsulated lead keel that will absorb impact if you hit something hard.
Having a rudder mounted on a full skeg for added protection.
Not having large windows that are vulnerable to green water impact
Having a galley that isn't part of the saloon. The galley should be capable of being used at sea to make a meal.
Having seaberths in the middle of the boat as low as possible, close to the keel, where motion is least.
Oversized deck gear that can take a storm.
Heavy duty rigging

I like this list though I think low quarter berths are pretty comfortable since the axis of rotation for pitching is often aft of center for most boats. The only one of your points we might need to explore is the keel. I have an encapsulated keel and have always had full confidence in it in the event of a hard strike. But I was schooled a bit on this recently in this thread about keels that came up some time back:
https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...on-2930-3.html
see post 43. I had never seen damage to an encapsulated keel before so this was a wake-up call as to what is possible. I now think the more secure construction would involve bolting the lead keel to a keel stub that is well supported with the hull and a stub that may be notched, like the Yankee 28 has, to take the force of a blow instead of solely the bolts.

I was also thinking that access to the water is important (to me anyway) since most bluewater boats have high freeboards. I think a sugar scoop now would be one of my must-haves.

[Superjunkman]

Originally Posted by MicHughV

A lot of people aspire to sail around the world, etc, but may not necessarily have the coin to buy the "perfect" boat, and must therefore find the boat that suits their wallet.

The lack of funds does not stop them from going however, and in my travels I've come across countless skippers and their respective boats of every kind of size and design.

One only needs to look at rtw trips by Robin Lee Graham, Tania Aebi, Matt Rutherford's around America's voyage, and many others, etc. These were all accomplished in relatively small and inexpensive run-of-the-mill fiberglass sloops, a testament to their pluck as much as the capability of their respective craft.

Would these have been considered " blue water" boats as opined by this thread, no, probably not, but that did not make them any less capable of accomplishing "blue water" voyages...

If you’re actually taking time to read the responses you’d know that my tastes skew heavily towards the older well built simple FG boats.

As to your specific question RLG very nearly died upon Dove 1 when he was rolled, distasted, and had his large weak portlight stove upon the Indian Ocean. That boat was in no way a blue Ayer boat. He in fact switched to a Luders 33 after. This proves my point. The Albin 27 that you asked about is a fine sea boat. With just a little work you can safely head to most reasonable destinations. What one aspires to or believes or has in the bank doesn’t make a vessel more or less suitable. They are what they are.

[Wandering1]

Originally Posted by danstanford

My point was that throughout this thread we have many opinions based on lots of facts and myths while this is proof that having been there and done that is not sufficient. Fitting in with the use case argument I suppose.

So you you don't believe that experience builds knowledge? The more you do something the more knowledge you have of that thing?
I know several cruisers who have done some ocean sailing in production boats. Contrary to what many people think who never sail oceans, they say that their next boat will be heavier.
Thr modern production boat with its soap dish hull does not make a comfortable cruising boat in the ocean

[donradcliffe]

Here is a tough blue water boat made of cored fiberglass. The Sydney 38 design has run many Sydney Hobart races. This particular one was run onto the Farallon Islands by going inside the surfline. It spent weeks being pushed further onto the rocks before it was choppered off.

Note that the hull structure and fin keel are relatively intact. The crew that stayed on the boat survived.

Your traditional solid glass boat would have been kindling.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Superjunkman

Well
Everybody has different standards. We can all
Acknowledge that. Mine are based on an education at a maritime school, 15 years at sea as a professional mariner, 40+ years of sailing, and my subsequent life as a professional in the field of composites and boat building. So forgive me for not lowering mine or being interested in lay opinions.

PS. I love Wharrams.. they’re built tough. You see them all over

[danstanford]

Originally Posted by Wandering1

So you you don't believe that experience builds knowledge? The more you do something the more knowledge you have of that thing?
I know several cruisers who have done some ocean sailing in production boats. Contrary to what many people think who never sail oceans, they say that their next boat will be heavier.
Thr modern production boat with its soap dish hull does not make a comfortable cruising boat in the ocean

To be honest, I don't have an opinion on the topic, I was just trying to point out that even these guys with multiple laps of the planet in some/all cases will be re-assessing their standards of ocean-worthiness as they finish.

I don't mean to rain on the conversation, just was pointing out how some of the blanket statements made here as fact may lack depth. I have ocean time and I have chatted with people who have more of it, but I sure don't feel qualified to state what a 'blue water boat' should be.

[Superjunkman]

Originally Posted by Don C L

I like this list though I think low quarter berths are pretty comfortable since the axis of rotation for pitching is often aft of center for most boats. The only one of your points we might need to explore is the keel. I have an encapsulated keel and have always had full confidence in it in the event of a hard strike. But I was schooled a bit on this recently in this thread about keels that came up some time back:
https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...on-2930-3.html
see post 43. I had never seen damage to an encapsulated keel before so this was a wake-up call as to what is possible. I now think the more secure construction would involve bolting the lead keel to a keel stub that is well supported with the hull and a stub that may be notched, like the Yankee 28 has, to take the force of a blow instead of solely the bolts.

I was also thinking that access to the water is important (to me anyway) since most bluewater boats have high freeboards. I think a sugar scoop now would be one of my must-haves.

A sugar scoop transom cuts both ways. While it make it easier to board the vessel it doesn’t make the vessel more seaworthy.

[Superjunkman]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Here is a tough blue water boat made of cored fiberglass. The Sydney 38 design has run many Sydney Hobart races. This particular one was run onto the Farallon Islands by going inside the surfline. It spent weeks being pushed further onto the rocks before it was choppered off.

Note that the hull structure and fin keel are relatively intact. The crew that stayed on the boat survived.

Your traditional solid glass boat would have been kindling.

So you think that this boat fared better because it had a 10’ keel and a sail drive but a heavily built boat would’ve been torn to bits?

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by Superjunkman

A sugar scoop transom cuts both ways. While it make it easier to board the vessel it doesn’t make the vessel more seaworthy.

But does it make it less? I wasn't thinking in terms of seaworthiness in this case.

[Superjunkman]

Boats with sugar scoop transoms are typically modern beamy back aft type boats that go pretty good downwind but are vulnerable to being pooped and really vulnerable when laying to a sea anchor and making any sort of sternway in seas. You can dig that sugar scoop into the water.

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by Superjunkman

Boats with sugar scoop transoms are typically modern beamy back aft type boats that go pretty good downwind but are vulnerable to being pooped and really vulnerable when laying to a sea anchor and making any sort of sternway in seas. You can dig that sugar scoop into the water.

I was thinking of one more like this (and I hope the link works) on a Hunter that was added on.
https://www.morgan38.org/morgan38/in...-add-on.14930/
Granted a Hunter is not a heavier displacement hull, but I could see a mod like this on something like my own boat or a Cape Dory.
Do you think a wave rolling up behind that would really cause any more of a poop? Or would it significantly add to diving in while using a sea anchor. I kinda doubt it. And if lying to a sea anchor I’d hope there is little movement aft since rudder damage is the greater threat, no? But the advantage of being able to get close to the water to retrieve someone or yourself on an emergency deems it one of those things I’d include. I’m well aware of easily deployed ladders too.
Anyway everything is a trade off of course and that’s really what this discussion is about.

[MicHughV]

My Beneteau has the typical French open transom design.
For years I thought this concept was a pretty dumb idea, but have come to love it.
Even in large following seas, the stern, which is quite wide, has a lot of reserve buoyancy and tends to lift above a wave.

I have yet to lay to a sea anchor though, and probable never will, as in really foul weather have always run off trailing a drogue, my preferred heavy weather tactic.
Were I to be pooped though, any water in the cockpit would run right out the back in seconds.
A relatively high sill keeps the water from entering the inside, though undoubtable some will find it's way inside.

On the plus side it's a very fast boat. On the negative side it does have one or two annoying feature I don't like, but accept.

I think most any boat is a compromise, you as the skipper can choose which one's you want to live with.