Conference unifix::sailing

My opinion, based on twelve years of cruising the New England coast and 
one round trip to Bermuda on my 32' cutter:

Many if not most of the boats advertised as bluewater boats aren't. The 
rest are, but only after considerable additional work to really prepare 
them for offshore sailing.

Being capable of offshore sailing is more than just size and strength -- 
it includes ease of handling, liveability, easy motion, capable of 
carrying sufficient food, water, spares, etc. The weight and volume of 
food, clothing, water, books, electronics, and so on needed for a given 
passage does not depend on boat size. 

If the boat is small, you will be forced to carry less of everything,
which will increase the risk and discomfort. Small boats are, sadly,
more vulnerable to wind and sea than large boats (I'd be surprised if
anyone would insure a 24' boat for an ocean crossing). The motion of a 
small boat is much more severe than the motion of a larger boat in any 
given sea, and a small boat is less able to sail to weather in strong 
winds (which is unimportant only when there are no lee shores within 
a few hundred miles). 

Having lived aboard our boat for as long as three weeks and after 
sailing to Bermuda and back, I wouldn't go on an extended voyage on a 
boat any smaller than our present boat. It is interesting to note some 
of the statistics reported by Jimmy Cornell in Modern Ocean Cruising. 
Owners of boats under 35' gave them an overall rating of 7.75 (on a 
scale of 1 to 10). Boats in the 35' to 40' range were rated 9.27, 40' 
t0 45' were rated 8.83, and boats over 45' were rated 9.25. Of 57 boats 
surveyed in Suva, only 7 were under 30' in length. 

By the way, are you planning on sailing alone or with someone?

    I'm no expert, am in about the same place you seem to be, and am
    looking forward to the responses your note generates.  I can't
    resist putting in my two cents worth though.
    
    I suspect that a major consideration is your definition of "safely".
    There has been some discussion on this point in these notes in the
    last couple of weeks.  At least one person crossed the atlantic
    on a sailboard and another rowed it.  Neither comes close to my
    definition of safe, much less comfortable.
    
    I am coming to the conclusion that no small boat can cross any large
    body of water without some risk worth considering.  Preperation
    is a big factor I'm sure, and I would enjoy seeing some recomendations
    from those who have done it.   Maybe someone has some guidelines
    or experience to share on assessing the risk of an ocean crossing
    in any given boat or, conversly, assesing the suitability of a boat
    to the crossing.  Also, how to find the weak points and what to
    do about them.  (Eg: fix it, replace it, buy a different boat)
    
    Can the risk be quantified at all?  Has anyone seen statistics on
    boats/people lost at sea as a percentage of successfull voyages
    or days at sea?  It seems likely that insurance companies must have 
    done some work on something like this, perhaps even by boat size,
    type, manufacturer, or ocean.  
    
    Rick, hopefull-for-something-quantifiable

	Well' I'll put 2c here too! Seems to me that the question of size is
	somewhat overemphasized here. A few years back one of our (then
	budding) sailing heroes did the Ostar (two men/women and a boat across
	the Atlantic, racing) in a 24' boat with no problems. Also just
	last year a few young guts from our sailing club did the ARC (Atlan-
	tic Rally for Cruisers) in a boat of 7m70cm (whatever that is in feet)
	and again, no problems.

	What is true is that with boats less that 30'-35' you have to be VERY
	careful in your selection, for small boats low price is a very driving
	factor, and therefore this size of boats is more likely to produce
	"rotten eggs".

	What is important to consider is the whole, of which the boat is only
	a (albeit important) part. You also have to consider crew size and
	experience (a smaller boat is actually easier to reef etc. in marginal
	conditions), equipment carried (you don't need all that high tech gear),
	food and water (food can be fairly light at the cost of a higher prize),
	the route selected (going from Nuffinland to Iceland to Norway is
	different from going some further south) etc.

	Comfort is then an issue all by itself. A big boat (Swan 62 :-), say,
	preferably with a crew) is ofcourse more confortable than 24' feet with
	no crew nor gourmet level kitchen. Now it all depends on your priori-
	ties. I think that if you start out "shoestring", your main concern
	is not comfort but getting there, so this should be no problem. In
	most cases a 24' boat with good (no standard stuff here) sea berths 
	gives you the sleep you need in normal conditions. When it gets rough,
	you sleep no more in 30' that in 24'!

	Crossing the Atlantic (as well as driving to work) always is a risk,
	but part of the exitement of sailing is that element of risk involved.
	It's your choice how it fits into your picture, where the risk is still
	enjoyable (=adventure) and where it's not. And the feeling of achievment
	is normally in direct proportion to the adventure.

	Good luck, H�kan

	Forgot to say :

	Joshua Slocum did the first circumnavigation of this our planet in
	a boat about 20', no high tech gear, no coast guard and helicopters,
	no harbour guides,.... no nothing. So what's too small?

    
    As you go up in size the size of components to deal
    with the increased stresses increases exponentially.  If you have
    a finite crew size you can exceed th the strength of the crew.  
    Therefore the boat shoud not exceed the crews ability
    to trim, reef, haul the anchor, etc.  The price of evverything
    (and the more things`are required' %^)eto fill it) changes while the owners
    ability to pay is (at least in my case) is finite and reasonably fixed.
    
    re .4 I think SPRAY was closer to 36 feet.  
    
                                              

    Joshua Slocombs boat, the SPRAY, was about 38', and now widely agreed
    to be about as unsuitable a boat as could have been found. He did
    it because he was out of work as a sailing ship captain and someone
    gave him the boat for free.
    
    Robert Mandry crossed the Atlantic in TINKERBELLE, a 12' Old Town
    wood boat. Many people have sailed or rowed it, as well as the Pacific.
    A fellow from Maine (Taylor ???) did it a few years ago in an 8'
    boat. He dissapeared at sea later trying to reach Australia.
    
    A friend of mine built all the gear for the boat which was rowed
    across the Antartic, from Cape Horn to Antartica last January.
    
    One often expressed theory by very small boat owners is that the
    smaller boat is safer since it is a much shorter relative to wave
    lengths- it simply rides up and down them 'like a corked bottle
    in the sea' Boats really take a beating when the hull length and
    wavelength are aproxmately the same.
    
    There have been dozens of books written about such small boat trips.
    International Marine Publishing offers many. I own several and would
    be willing to loan then to other DECies in this area. (Hmmm wonder
    if we could create some kind of NOTE readers Lending Library???)
    
    Go for it, and leave all that high-tech stuff off the boat! 

    ron

re .2:

Insurance companies don't, so far as I know, make their loss statistics 
available. When we were trying to get insurance for our Bermuda trip, I 
probably called 50 brokers -- laughter was the most common reaction to 
our boat being under 40'. There are, I gather, very few companies 
interested in insuring yachts for offshore sailing, and convincing them 
to insure a small boat is difficult. I finally found insurance, but one 
of the stipulations was that I had to have a crew of four or more. 
Otherwise, no insurance. To be sure, insurance underwriters are a very 
conservative lot, but the difficulty in insuring any yacht for offshore 
sailing says a lot about the risks. The insurance rate for our Bermuda 
trip would imply that the underwriter thought that there was (very 
roughly) one chance in 300 we'd not survive the round trip.

Just a thought: It is one thing to say that, yes, it is risky to sail a 
small boat offshore and, yes, I am willing to take that risk. It is 
another thing entirely to actually live with that risk all day, every 
day. 

    Alan, I hope to crew with one other person. 
    One of the many reasons I was thinking that small may be fine were
    points brought up earlier in replies to my original question.
    I want to be able to have one of us to be able to single-hand the
    boat with little trouble in case one is ill, etc. I am willing to
    give up some of the creature comforts to make the trip ( obviously
    a boat creating a living hell for an environment is worthless though,
    no enjoyment there :^(  ). I am willing to beef up the boat with
    backing plates on all thru hull fittings, etc. I also believe I
    won't be able to insure the boat for what I want to do, and the
    size of crew I want to do it with. I am assuming that the primary
    factor for the insurance is for hull loss. This means I really can't
    go out on a boat not paid for...bank would have a fit....and I want
    to buy the most boat for my money (which sadly, isn't a great deal)
    that will keep us safe, is sea-worthy, and will allow me to sleep
    without worrying about the risks that Alan brings up. The survey
    results on boat size are very interesting. Do you suppose the
    results are because the range with the highest ratings just happen
    to be due to sheer numbers in the survey, or are they really the
    best (30-40 ft range that is). 
    
    The boat I was looking at does have a history of sailing from mass
    to the carribean, and through the Gulf of Mexico. Does that qualify
    it any more as a "proven" blue water cruiser? The remark that most
    advertised cruising boats really aren't has me a bit concerned....
    How does one tell? Boats I wouldn't even consider (catalinas for
    example) have been used to some extent for this. I can't go on whats
    out there because they may be piloted by someone who never asked
    the question, but are doing well. Any thoughts?

    Small is vary relative.  I have been in Atlantic storms where the
    425' submarine I served aboard, running at 200', wasnt enough.
    
    What matters is the construction suitability of the vessel and the
    level of preparation of the boat and crew.
    
    The biggest problem is sorting thru the hundreds of small boats
    suited to only protected waters for the few suited to the high seas.
    
    Forget insurance. You are your only insurance of any real worth.
    If you cannot afford to lose the money invested in the boat, you
    are not prepared to go anywhere.
    
    By the way, singlehanding does not require a very small boat, but
    you do become more dependent on mechanical devices in a larger boat
    to make things go. So preparedness then means selecting the right 
    hardware in the beginning then having the material and skills
    to make things that do fail work again.

    Walt

I'd suggest you read all of Larry and Lin Pardey's "Serrafyn" series -- 
they cruised for seven (?) years together on a 23' Lyle Hess design Larry 
built, and recommend the simple, inexpensive, go-now route to start 
cruising.  They are recognized as probably the most experienced and 
knowledgeable small boat (<25') ocean cruisers in the world today.

But it's interesting that when circumstances allowed, they did come ashore
for a few years to build a 30' Lyle Hess design (now offered in fibreglass
as the Bristol Channel Cutter), and are off cruising once more. 

J.

re.9

>    What matters is the construction suitability of the vessel and the
>    level of preparation of the boat and crew.

How do you assess the suitability?
    
>    The biggest problem is sorting thru the hundreds of small boats
>    suited to only protected waters for the few suited to the high seas.
 
What are the sort criterion?     

Rick,

To expand on some earlier comments:

The load carrying ability of a small boat is (obviously) less than that
of a larger boat. For any given crew size, the load to be carried (food,
water, clothes, charts and other navigational equipment, etc) is roughly
the same. In fact, it might be argued that for a specific passage, the
small boat must carry more food and water than a larger boat (for the
same size crew) since the average speed of a smaller boat is less and
the smaller boat will be more often delayed by bad weather. For example, 
will the 24' boat you are considering sail to weather in a gale or near 
gale? Returning from Bermuda we sailed close hauled in 20 to 35 knot 
winds and seas up to 15' for almost three days, and I suspect that 
having to do this was not all that unusual. The interior volume of a 
boat (very roughly) increases as the cube of the length while sail area, 
etc, (very roughly) increases as the square of the length. A small 
increase in overall length greatly increases living space and load 
carrying ability.

If you do decide to go offshore in a small boat, be sure you understand
the risks. I think that, beyond question, sailing a small boat offshore
is significantly more risky than sailing a larger boat. If you do it, be
sure you and your companion can live comfortably with the risks. Some of
what has been said in other replies to this note strikes me as
rationalization to avoiding really facing the risks. For example, it
really is safer to have loran, satnav, and radar than to not have them.
A small boat making landfall needs every bit as much navigational help
as a larger boat. What is really being said, I think, is that risk is ok.
Yes, it is, but only if you understand the risk and accept it. Go 
simple, go small, but go means also taking bigger risks. The Pardeys 
have much experience and good advice, but they are a truly exceptional
couple. And, for example, they are comfortable with the risk of not having 
a liferaft. Emphatically, I'm not. 

Living in a confined space with another person is difficult physically
and emotionally. I'm comfortable for long periods with my partner in 
life aboard our boat. I find additional people on board difficult for 
extended periods of time (four people on our boat is rather like two 
people on a 24' boat). The only difference between going to sea in a 
small boat and going to jail is that you might drown at sea (paraphrased 
from someone else). Lack of standing headroom is perhaps bearable for a 
time, but I would find it intolerable for living aboard.

Finally, with experience and the right equipment, a large boat can be 
sailed singlehanded. Don't feel that you must have a small boat to be 
able to singlehand it. After all, Dan Byrne was nearly 60 years old when 
he sailed a Valiant 40 in the first BOC race. Good self-steering and 
careful design of sailhandling systems make sailing a larger boat not 
too difficult. When the two of us first sailed our 32' boat, we found it 
not easy to sail. Now, some years later, I've sailed it from Marblehead to 
Maine alone. 

Which boats are good offshore boats and which aren't? Without intending
any offense or disrespect, if you don't know the answer to this
question, you may lack the experience and knowledge to choose the right
boat for you. The complexity of boat design and offshore sailing is
incredible, and many, many choices and tradeoffs must be made. Cost of
the boat is only one of the considerations, and cost, in my opinion, is 
not the most important one. 

Read books and magazines, talk to people who have sailed offshore in all
sizes of boats, ask what their ideal boat is and why, ask what works and
what doesn't, crew on an offshore passage, look at as many boats as you
can, etc. One of my reasons for sailing to Bermuda was to find out what
offshore sailing is really like. I found the experience challenging and
enjoyable, but also unpleasant, uncomfortable, and at times rather
frightening. I still want to sail offshore, but not on a boat smaller
than I own, and I'd rather have a bigger (40') boat. 

Remember, everyone has their prejudices and biases, and it is important 
to understand them in assessing the value of someone's opinions. I have 
found myself becoming more risk adverse as I get older, and also as I 
learn more about sailing. I consider sailing is more dangerous now 
than I did when I started sailing twelve years ago. 

    The only thing I can do is agree with all that has been said.  As
    Alan has aptly said each of us has our own opinions and prejudices
    regarding boat types, sizes, equipment, risks, etc.  What you are
    finding is that there is no "right" answer to your question.
    
    I agree that the Pardy's books are good, but I saw them speak in
    Newport several years ago and fear they are way above us "Part time"
    sailors.  They are Purists in the purist sense.  They refuse to
    have or use an engine or other mechanical device.  They relay on
    minimul electronics and no electrical support.
    
    There are 2 others that would make good reading;  Tristen Jones
    and Frank Mulville (sp?).  They are pragmatic single handing sailors
    who understand that offshore sailing is more of an art than science
    and prepare their boats accordingly.
    
    As far as insurance is concerned; FORGET IT!  There are (as Alan
    highlighted) few or no companies that underwrite offshore passages.
    This means that you are in it ALL BY YOURSELF.  Acknowledge that
    and plan accordingly.  I don't think that insurance reports would
    show an accurate picture anyway.  I know that if I lost my boat
    on the offshore trips I have been on, I probably wouldn't even call
    my agent.  I keep my insurance up to date only because I know I
    can't get another company to insure my 28 year old boat for coastal
    cruising.  The only reason I keep it is because I have suffered
    more damage at dock, than at sea.
    
    As far as length is concerned, my 29' Columbia road out a gale in
    the Atlantic in relative ease (nothing is easy during a storm) while
    a 60' racing sloop was having a hell of time running before the
    storm because their length caused them to dive through the waves.
    I spoke the skipper of the Tall Ship "SAGRES" and they also were
    having problems due to their size.
    
    Offshore sailing is a compromize between any and all parameters.
    There are no rules and no clear answers.  Follow your instincts
    and do what you feel is right and safe, without being foolhardy,
    but enjoy what you do and don't worry too much.  It takes away much
    of the pleasure if your worrying all the time.
    
    Good Sailing,
    Jeff
    
    
    
    

    What has not been said is that you are choosing an excellent time
    to be in the boat market.  I would not doubt that a very substantial
    30 footer could be had for far less than you imagined.  Especially
    if cosmetics don't bother you (and they shouldn't if you're going
    offshore anyway).  A safe 24 footer would have to be so specialized
    that I doubt it would be cheaper than a beefed up production 29
    or 30 footer.  Not all would do, but lots of older fiberglass
    production boats were so "overbuilt" before this crazy trend toward
    extreme lightness that I would certainly feel safeer than in anything
    less than 30 feet.  
    
    The point that is that, sure, a small boat will probably do, and
    you can be as extreme as the Pardy's (they irritate the hell out
    of me with their condescending text) but maybe there are more realistic
    approaches that need to be explored.
    
    When I do it, I agree with Alan, I want to be in a solid 40 footer
    with one beautiful woman that loves to, er, sail.  Yeah, that's
    it, sail.
    
    Dave

    Look at the construction of a Pacific Seacraft Flicka, then
    an O'Day-Catalina-younameit. The former is suitable for offshore
    conditions, the latter might survive but not intended for such
    use.
    
    There are some older fiberglass boats that have solid hull construction
    and could, with new rigging and steering gear, go offshore with
    relative safety. The Pearson Triton (OK I know its 29') and older
    Columbia's come to mind.
    
    Dont take this as personal endorsement for ocean sailing in small
    boats...my druthers lean toward the QE2.
    
    Walt

    Guys, thanks for *ALL* the responses, you've given me very valuable
    food for thought. Alan, I also take your points very well - thanks.
    I've looked at construction of several boats and am getting a much
    better understanding of what exists. I've decided the best thing
    I could do is continue beefing up my sailing experience, learning
    navigation and other necessary skills, read, read, read, and really
    understand what it is I want my boat to do and what I want on it.
    Something tells me that the boat market is not turning around in
    the next 12 months and I will be 12 months wiser.
    Thanks again for all the input!
    Robert

    Being on the West Coast I've met and sailed with the Pardy"s - I
    dont agree with their beliefs but you must give them credit for
    having cruised for eleven (11) years aboard a boat that was less
    than 24 feet long, and the cockpit was almost half of that length.
    
    The important factor is not the boat, but you.  What are you capable
    of?  I think it would be harder to make a long passage in a small
    boat than a larger one.  Any size boat can be rigged to be sailed
    alone or by a crew of 2 or 10.  The question is, "Can you all live
    with in the space there is?"  
    
    I've sailed to Mexico twice (even surving the Cobo storm of Dec.82)
    and spent a year in the South Pacific and believe me there are every
    type and length of boat out there.  And all doing well.  A 25 ft.
    0r 30 ft. or 40 ft. boat will not make as much difference in a killer
    storm or a rough wave as you mental attitude.
    
    Best of luck what ever you do.
    
    

    Some thoughts:
    
    Good decision to postpone until more experienced/knowledgeable.  
    As Kurt Vonnegut says, God protects the innocent as a matter of
    heavenly routine, but even he screws up sometimes.

    Did TransAtlantic some years ago in 48 foot Hood Yawl with best
    of everything.  Fifty miles off Newport had spreader fail in 30
    knot wind and returned to Marblehead with pieces of stick on deck
    for new spar.  Would not have wanted to have been at leeward rail
    when it went, and was glad to have capacity for lengthy go under
    power (point against small boat #1).  Left refitted 2 days later 
    in fair breeze, celebrating with balance of crew over aged bottle
    of Jerez (sherry) - entire crew seasick for 24 hours, glad to have
    fairly comfortable motion and room to stretch out (#2).  Ran into
    5-6 days of calm with less than abundant progress and occasional
    pea soup.  Radar picked up large freighter at night in time to start
    diesel and alter course.  Was glad to see her in advance, was glad
    to have our radar reflector at 50 feet above wl rather that 30 feet,
    although still no guarantee that we were even noticed (#'s 3,4),
    but at least we could react.
    
    600 miles off coast of Ireland ran into wee bit of weather with
    gusts to 70 kts, deranged seas and all else you would expect.  Not
    comfortable under best of circumstances, but glad to be 48 feet
    and well (also EXPENSIVELY) built (#5).  Glad to have space for storm
    sail inventory as well as, just in case, emergency gear (#6).
    
    Arrived Bantry Bay Ireland in 18 1/2 days without fresh water shower,
    with salt dampness in most clothing, and looking askance at 6 good 
    friends who were also questioning me and each other after so much time 
    in close proximity (see note previous from submariner - he can describe).  
    Still, we had done something exhilarating together that none of
    us will ever forget, and all in all, had been fairly comfortable
    considering.  Plus, we had made it (#7)!         
                                                  
    Met up at customs with with unimproved Cal 20 stock boat who had
    crossed a week earlier and arrived just prior to big storm we ex-
    perienced.  His forward bulkheads had loosened up and he could no
    longer keep shrouds tight, cracks in deck, etc. (i.e. mucho boat 
    flex).  But, he had made it also (small boat #1).
    
    Kurt Vonnegut was correct.
    
    Final score: Big boat 7 - small boat 1
                                          
    Final note;  You might canvas readers for questions they think you
    need to know the answers to before you become a deep water sailor.
    Could be a good test of competence.  To start the ball rolling:
    What is difference between chopped fiber and hand lay-up ?
    How do you find hairline crack in swaged shroud fitting ?
    How do you do sail stitch ?
    Differences between clove hitch & round turn with two half-hitches?
    How do you repair hull puncture below waterline while at sea ?
    If all means of propulsion fail in mid-trip, where will you end
    up & how do you figure it out ?
    How do you coil and heave 3 strand line so that it NEVER kinks ?
    What one tool do you ALWAYS carry on your person ?
    How do you overhaul an engine ?
    Etc.
    
    Others ??? 
    
    PS For amusement, met a "Blue Water" hopeful sailor some time ago
       who wondered if you could buy 1000 feet of line in one piece
       for anchoring at sea, or do you have to buy several pieces and
       tie them together.  HONEST TRUTH !
    
    

    
    One variable which might have a substantial effect on the
    boat length you look for is hull material.  According to
    Tristan Jones he would be much happier on a long voyage
    with a non-plastic hull, preferably wood.  Several
    reasons were flexibility, ease of repair anywhere, etc. 
    Also, wood boats are much less expensive than on the great 
    lakes. Now that I am on salt water, it kills
    me to think of the deals I've passed up for 32-36' wood
    gems in favor of my 25' C&C. By the way, I had a Bristol
    24' which passed through some stiff Lake Ontario storms
    unharmed.  If you must go small plastic, it would be
    worth investigating.
    

	If somebody is still interested in the subject, the Nov. 88 edition
	of SAIL contains an article about a boat (16 feet), two people and
	a hurricane......

	Enjoy, H�kan

	PS. Thanks for correcting me on Spray, I lived with the strong 
	    impression that it was 6 m.

    
    I just returned from a trip to Miami where I visited Planet Ocean
    with my kids. There was on display a sailboat that had crossed from
    the Canary Islands to Florida. It's name was "APRIL FOOL" and it
    measured 4'-0" LOA! It was almost as wide as it was long and was
    made of plywood and fiberglass. I believe it made the Guinness book
    of records.

The opposite to the question "what's too small for the Atlantic?" is 
"what's too large (for a small crew)?" 

Last week I crewed on a Sequin 44 on a five-day passage from St
George's, Bermuda, to Marblehead, MA. The Sequin 44 is a semi-custom 
28000 lb Sparkman and Stevens designed sloop built by Lyman-Morse in
Maine. The boat sailed beautifully (6+ knots to weather in a 30 knot NE
wind in the Gulf Stream) and was very comfortable even in lumpy sea.
(Fresh, cold cantalope for lunch the fourth day out was definitely
nice.) 

But ..... the boat didn't have self-steering usable under sail in heavy 
weather. Manual steering was quite tiring (we changed helmspersons every 
half-hour). All the gear was big, strong, and heavy. Recovering from a 
broken roller furling drum line that allowed a fair-sized genoa to 
unroll completely at night in a 30 knot wind and 10+ foot Gulf Stream 
seas was a job for four crew. Reefing the mainsail was a three-person 
job. I was rather relieved that I never had to help change a headsail in 
rough weather.

All of this made it obvious that there is an upper limit to the size of 
boat that can be handled by a small crew in bad weather. That limit 
obviously depends on the design of the boat and the way the boat is rigged. 
This particular Sequin 44 would need at least four crew (we were six). 

My particular sailing interest is cruising with a small crew (two). My
experience last week tends to confirm my view that, for me, a
cutter-rigged boat of 32 to no more than 40 feet is the right boat. 

    Alan, You bring up an interesting point....
    Since asking the initial question I have been looking at and have
    sailed several boats. One "deal" I have come across is a Freeport 41
    in an 80% completion phase; meaning the guy bought a new hull in 1983.
    has installed most everything in the interior save the plumbing and
    electrical wiring and kitchen accessories. The interior needs the
    padding put in the roof, and the engine mounting completed. From an
    interior standpoint, this guy is good... this is the 3rd boat he has
    built and his joinery is superb. None of the thru-hulls have been put
    in, nor has the rudder or any associated steering been placed yet.
    He has all masts and booms purchased from the folks who did the ones
    for the America's cup. The price for this baby you ask? A mere $38K.
    He lost his job and is in desparate financial straits. This kind of
    boat new is @$160k. I've found one in New Hampshire for $99,900.
    It has the infamous center cockpit of which you so detest :-).
    Questions: Does anyone out there know anything about this boat?
    Do you serious blue water sailors have any thoughts on whether 2 people
    could handle this (ketch rigged, club footed staysail, Jib) easily on
    an extended cruise? The livability of this boat looks to be great... if
    it sails well would this be a good buy for a long term cruising boat?
    Any thoughts in general? I'm framing my desires now to 30-41 feet of
    craft and trying to figure out what will be managable, safe, and
    enjoyable on an extensive voyage.  Thanks for all your help!
    
    Robert.

Certainly, a properly designed and equipped 41' boat can be handled by 
two experienced people. But ...... 

Based on my personal experience, I think that it would be wise to not 
buy a boat for offshore sailing, extended cruising, and/or living aboard 
(especially a large boat) until you have:

  o  have done some extended coastal cruising (at least a month at a 
     time) in at least somewhat difficult and varied conditions

  o  actually made one or more long offshore passages

Until you've done this, you really have no personal experience with what
blend of boat size, equipment, rig, interior layout, etc, are the best
for you. An example: Ross Faneuf was one of my crew on our return
passage from Bermuda in 1987. This was Ross' first offshore passage, and
afterwards he joked that the trip was going to cost him $10 000. Why?
Because he now felt certain additional equipment (eg, a windvane) to be
necessary for the boat he is building. Even more importantly, however,
as discussed in Note 1223 (among others), you may find that you do not 
like offshore sailing or the cruising life or whatever.

It is also important to realize that a larger boat, regardless of its
initial cost, is more expensive to maintain, repair, equip, etc, than a
smaller boat. A larger boat is also physically more demanding to handle.
(The Hiscock's last boat was smaller than their previous boat.) 

As to the Freeport 41 you ask about: 80% complete means that hundreds to
a few thousand hours of work remain to be done. I think that the wiring,
plumbing, and thru-hulls should have been done along with the interior
joinerwork. Installing them afterward is much more difficult (having
just replaced two seacocks I have some experience with this). To finish
the boat and equip it for cruising is likely to require several tens of
thousands of dollars. For example, I assume that the boat lacks sails
and standing and running rigging. I'd not be surprised if these alone
cost $10 000 to $15 000. Ground tackle, electronics, spare parts,
charts, etc, can be another $10 000 to $20 000. There is good reason for
the asking price of $38 000. There are many, many ready-to-sail,
well-built, well-equipped 30 to 35' boats available for a reasonable
price (like less than $60 000). A good friend of ours just bought a nice
Bristol 35 for $49 000. 

But, then, these are just my narrow minded opinions! 

    Thanks Alan,
    After doing a lot more research and snuggling up to design books and
    catalogs I can to the same general conclusions. 

    Re 22:
    
    On a only-slightly-related note, I've seen 4 people handle a
    110' Brigantine (the "Romance") overnight. Good planning, searoom,
    and LOTS of experience were all that were necessary...
    
    Peter

    Proceeds from the sale of my boat just hit the bank yesterday and
    already I'm suffering pangs of withdrawal.
    
    Last night while browsing the local newstand I happened upon the
    cover of this month's Chesapeake Bay magazine. Pictured is an
    absolutely beautiful (in my mind anyway) small boat identified only as
    a "Sailmaster 22". I can't tell if it's all wood, or simply has a lot
    of wood trim. Somewhat reminiscent of a classic Sparkman & Stephens design
    in 1/2 scale.
    
    The name doesn't show up in BUC nor is it familiar to a couple of local
    brokers I asked.
    
    Anyone heard of it?
    
    John

    My neighbour in Chichester is in the process of selling his Vancover 32
    which solo , well err the odd female hitch hiker, he has done two
    trans Atlantics and one circumnavigation. he is going to buy and fit
    out a traditional deep long keeled 23 ft gaff rigged craft. Apparantly
    very similiar to the first boat he did a trans Atlantic in.  
    
    So what is small ?!!
    
    Pete  

    Hi John,
    This is not much, but;
    From the SAIL Magazine SAILBOAT & SAILBOAT EQUIPMENT DIRECTORY I have;
    
    1971 
    	SAILMASTER 22, SAILMASTER 26 MK.II,  and SAILMASTER 45
    		Sailmasters, Inc.
    		Foot of 2nd St
    		Annapolis, MD
    1975  
    	No Listing.
    
    1982 
    	SAILMASTER 22
    		Tollendal Creek Marina
    		RR #4, Barrie, ONT, Canada L4M 4S6
    
    These are only in the list in the back, no pictures or specs.
    
    Go for it. 22 Feet can be 'just' right.
    
    Fred
    MR3PST::MARINR::DARROW

    Thanks Fred,
    
    I did some further digging (via BUC volume III) and in addition to
    your information I found that the boat was in production from 1963-70
    and that Sailmaster Inc had several other addresses in that time,
    including Annapolis and Shelter Island NY.
    
    Sailmaster 22  Beam: 7'   Draft: 2'4" (Full keel w/CB) Price: $3-6.5K
    Sailmaster 26  Beam: 7'9" Draft: 3'         ?                 $6-10K
    
    The 26 was a Tripp design. Don't know about the 22.
    
    Now I've been told that the boat was actually built in Holland and
    imported.  Anybody from that side of the pond have any more tidbits?
    
    John
    

    
    The "Mini Transat" is a transatlantic race reserved to 6.50 meters boats
    with one person crew.
    goes from UK or France, then Tenerife to La Guadeloupe (3000 miles).
    The winner last year needed 24 days.
    The race happens each year and was created 4 years ago.
    
    Boat size is not a success criteria but boat design is. 
                                                           
    Arnaud
    

    Well, I started this note and will finish it with a goodbye memo to
    all. Today is my last day with Digital. I'm one of the few who are
    leaving voluntarily. I will be working for Amdahl very soon helping
    them in their consulting services business.
    
    I want to let everyone know what a joy it has been to have access to
    you all via this notesfile and what a help it was. I learned so very
    much. It enabled us to purchase the correct boat for our dreams- an
    Alden 36. We are still on track for leaving in 4 years for a 5 year
    trip.
    
    I want to wish everyone the very best of luck and God's blessings on
    you all.
    
    No need to respond. I won't be able to read them!
    
    Again, best wishes to everyone. Alan, thanks for running such a class
    notes conference. You do great work!
    
    Warmest Regards,
    Robert Cleveland