What design features make life aboard comfortable & practical for females?

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by Wilma Ham, Aug 20, 2006.

  1. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member

    If there's no such thing as a cruiser-racer, what do you call "Sunstone" (S&S 40).

    It's been British offshore racing Yacht of the Year, won its class in the Fastnet and/or Channel race on IOR, IMS and IRC; won its IMS Class in the Sydney-Hobart, and won the Commodore's Cup, so it's clearly a racing yacht.

    It's been a liveaboard home since about 1985, cruised from the UK to NZ, Alaska and the South Pacific, so it's clearly a cruising yacht.

    If it cruises and it races, isn't it a cruiser/racer?

    What about Accanito; fairly good Admiral's Cupper (French team) so it's clearly a racing yacht. It's also been the liveaboard cruising home for a French couple cruising the Pacific for about 17 years, so it's clearly a cruising yacht too. If it cruises and it races isn't it a cruiser/racer?

    Many boats go away cruising locally for a week or two - that's cruising isn't it? Yet many of those boats also race. If it races and it cruises isn't it a cruiser/racer?

    Just because you don't see it at boat shows doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
     
  2. Tim B
    Joined: Jan 2003
    Posts: 1,438
    Likes: 59, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 841
    Location: Southern England

    Tim B Senior Member

    Just one thing...

    cruiser/racer meant either cruiser or racer. I was addressing both issues at the same time.

    A cruiser-racer is something different. It's what I would call a performance sportsboat. In my mind the ranking goes:

    Cruiser -- solid, easily managable, nice interior
    Sportsboat -- lighter with a little more sail, decent interior
    Performance Sportsboat -- lots more sail, adequate interior
    Racer -- very light, lots of sail, no real interior

    But that's just me.

    Tim B.
     
  3. Finlander
    Joined: Aug 2006
    Posts: 80
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 19
    Location: Europe

    Finlander Junior Member

    KISS Hard Dodger

    I know, I know, not another post about hard dodgers... Well, here's a KISS idea you might find interesting. I see lots of these: Picture a steel hard dodger that's built on the brick shithouse principle--that is, thick steel supports between windows and moderate window sizes. In a thousand years, the boat will be gone, but some archeologist will find the wheelhouse and cabin-top buried somewhere.

    The windows are plexiglass*. Nothing new there, right? But what's interesting is how they're installed:

    +The pieces are cut to overlap the steel dodger's window opening by about 1.5".

    +Then they're laid in a 1.5"-wide bed of silicone, directly on top of the openings.

    +To complete the proceedure, bolts are secured about every 6", around the perimeter, through the plexiglass. The bolts have round heads that are almost 1" wide.

    Sounds crude, but they actually look quite refined--in a very rugged sort of way, of course. Even the silicone bed isn't sloppy, like one might picture it to be. Nevertheless, it's definitely not something you'd see at a boat show.

    Will the windows ever rip-out in a major hurricane?

    Who cares? Just go to the next port, get a new piece of plexigass, a tube of silicone, and then start cutting and wrenching (or just have it cut for you).

    Can anyone think of any weaknesses to this KISS approach?


    *I assume it was plexiglass, not entirely sure of the material. It could have been Lexan or something.
     
  4. Frosty

    Frosty Previous Member

    You can race your cruiser and you can cruise your racer. You can do what ever you want. Bit like Land Rover racing!!!,--- if your racing other Land Rovers.
    The shear difference in uses there are so overwhelming that It stands to reason that the boat can do niether properly.
     
  5. yipster
    Joined: Oct 2002
    Posts: 3,486
    Likes: 97, Points: 58, Legacy Rep: 1148
    Location: netherlands

    yipster designer

    have you seen Dave Gerr's threat at http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=13389
    i sure like to hear the definition further elaborated !
     
  6. bntii
    Joined: Jun 2006
    Posts: 731
    Likes: 97, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 1324
    Location: MD

    bntii Senior Member

    Quote:
    "Small boats (under 45 footers) are not suitable for blue water criusing not because of thier sea ability but because of the comfort they misserably support. No woman wants to put up with small water tanks. no gen, **** in a paint tin mentality. Men niether if they would allow there wallets to agree."

    I cruise quite comfortably on 40' (with a woman) and find this sort of statement so subjective as to be laughable. Personal choices are not universal truths. One of the great things about cruising is the how varied the experience can be. We choose our boats, how to use them and where they take us. We have to remember that this thread, all the how to books and the like are really for those folks who have no experience. Outside of some basic seamanship and vessel design, a person needs to find out on their own terms what form the cruising experience will take.
     
  7. Paddy
    Joined: Aug 2006
    Posts: 38
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 15
    Location: Dublin, Ireland

    Paddy Junior Member

    Regarding V-berths ...
    I too don't like having to climb over my spouse or vice versa getting in or out of bed. That's not a practice that v-berth occupants can claim a monopoly on. Most double berths are at one side of the boat and invariably we twist and bump each other climbing in & out.

    My wife (Catherine) and I (Pat) are in a similar position as you Wilma, and are looking for a blue water cruiser to go away in circa 2008. One of the must haves is an island berth, not for passage making of course, but for when we get there; no matter where "there" happens to be. What surprises me is that there are so few boats with this arrangement. Overall we will spend many more nights in harbour / at anchor than under passage, and we both equally want our comfort.

    Which brings me to something that has been bugging me while I have read thro' this discussion. Why is it that everyone seems to refer to comfort as “for the ladies”? Sorry Wilma, but comfort is for us men too. However, that is the extent of my disagreement with you. Of course we should constantly challenge the things that we don't want. Fine if we're stuck with them as necessary compromises for the live-aboard lifestyle we'll put up with it, but let's make sure we really are stuck with it. Despite differing opinions, no one throughout this discussion is talking about sacrificing seaworthiness or safety.

    Our choice of boat is for something in the size range 35-40 foot. Despite the preceding discussion we see these as roomy enough while still maneuverable in some of tight harbours and marinas that we hope to visit. Sure, I don't want to be caught out in a hurricane, I'll use weather routing and common sense to avoid them, but if I am caught I don't think an extra 5 foot of boat is going to make a huge difference.
     
  8. Finlander
    Joined: Aug 2006
    Posts: 80
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 19
    Location: Europe

    Finlander Junior Member

    island berth

    Not easy on a 35- to 40-footer. Here are the choices for an island berth location:

    1). bow; pillows forward, as dicussed earlier in this thread;

    2). aft cabin; center cockpit must be quite a bit forward, which compromises forecabin layout; it's almost easier to have a cross-beam double (I forget what it's called); if it's long enough, then one person can crawl around the other's feet without disrupting them; it could be designed high enough to look out the window while laying in bed; great storage underneath; not everyone likes sleeping that way; or

    3). under cockpit; anything is possible if the cockpit floor is high and narrow enough; awkward cockpit enclosure due to height; engine would need to be forward, under raised deck saloon or in a box.
     
  9. Paddy
    Joined: Aug 2006
    Posts: 38
    Likes: 1, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 15
    Location: Dublin, Ireland

    Paddy Junior Member

    #1, bow, pillows fwd might do it, know of any make of boat that fits this?
    #2 was more the lines I was thinking of, but not the cross-beam (athwartships?) option, crawling around each other is something we'd put up with short term, but not for long term live-aboard. Again I haven't found too many suitable production boats or designs. The Moody 36/38/40 CC fits, but I think stowage is limited. Similarly the Beneteau 40 CC.
    One boat that I want a closer look at is the Wylo II, but there are few second hand about. Know any others?
    #3, Same question as above, any designs that you can point me to?

    I'm investigating building my own boat, that is to say, gettijng it built professionally to my spec, but I'm not confident my budget will stretch.

    Thank you for your thoughts.
     
  10. Frosty

    Frosty Previous Member

    Isnt this just my point,-- to have a decent cruising/live aboard life you need at least 45 foot. Its nothing to do with sea capabilities as I have said before, its criusing, and that means tankage sleeping arrangements ----everything.

    Sure you can squeeze into a 35 footer.
    I met some people once who said 'Oh we never go on board a bigger boat than ours. I asked why ' SHE said because it upsets us'

    Paddy, thers a 54 foot glass cat here in the marina with Vetus electric motors. The rigging is huge, a massive sea boat 150k Us will buy it.
     
  11. CT 249
    Joined: Dec 2004
    Posts: 1,709
    Likes: 82, Points: 48, Legacy Rep: 467
    Location: Sydney Australia

    CT 249 Senior Member


    No, it stands to reason that any boat that can be British Offshore Yacht of the Year (ie the BEST offshore racing boat in the whole country, out of about 2000), take wins in the Fastnet and Hobart and Channel races is in fact a very, very "proper" racer. These wins were earned against top-class competition; for example the Channel race was won against the entire Admiral's Cup fleet. The Commodore's Cup win came against teams from across the world and Europe, with pro campaigns including America's Cup winners. This is clearly a very competitive racing boat.

    It also stands to reason that a solid, comfortable shoal-draft boat that has been a liveaboard home for 25 years (I was wrong when I said 20), and a world-wide cruiser that has sailed from the UK to Alaska and New Zealand, Australia, the South Pacific, and the Caribbean is also in fact a very, very "proper" cruiser.

    When the same boat can do that (and for example switches to racing mode half-way through and takes an IMS Class win in the Hobart and almost wins the whole damn race against the latest Farrs, Reichel Pughs and other hotshot custom racers) it is surely both a champion racer (which it is) and a good cruiser (which it is). Therefore one boat can clearly do both extremely well.

    And to say that people cannot live happily aboard boats under 35 feet, when you are replying to people who do exactly that, seems to be saying that only your way of life is reasonable and that you are the sole judge of how to live. What gives you the right to tell bntii and others that the lives they live happily aren't "decent"?
     
  12. MikeJohns
    Joined: Aug 2004
    Posts: 3,192
    Likes: 208, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2054
    Location: Australia

    MikeJohns Senior Member

    Roberts Spray, Safety and size.

    Take two yachts, one with a 30 foot waterline the other with a 45 foot waterline similar design, same D/L ratio. On stability alone the bigger boat requires a wave 5 times the size to knock her down. In reality her moment of inertia will be around 7.5 greater making the safety factor greater again.

    The larger boat is inherently more seaworthy in the same conditions.


    Secondly we need a better yardstick than racing fleets , how do you normalize the data for an objective study when crew are just as, or even more important than the vessel?


    To try and keep this relavent to the thread of what women might want..... the motion of the boat I think is one of the most important factors of cruising experience and the one that causes many cruises to be abandoned usually (in my experience) because the female partner finds the sea too uncomfortable. Acceleration is impossible to reduce without upping the D/L ratio which is one of the reasons that pre disposes me to condemn light boats for cruising.

    An anecdote

    I was in Avarua harbour Raratonga when a 40 foot modern plastic production boat (Sun...) arrived, after clearing in the crew picked up from Papeete deserted the boat. I talked with the women who said they had been too ill to do anything that the motion was intolerable and that the 50 foot Roberts spray they had traveled from Panama Mexico to Papeete on was a dream boat. We can improve a lot on the Roberts Spray .


    The south sea trades often boil along at 25 knots kicking up a sea that many sailors would consider very uncomfortable especially when combined with the swell patterns coming North from the Southern ocean. I found the Caribbean trades much more genteel and the big swell component is missing.

    I'd take better comfort in any trade-off.
     
  13. marshmat
    Joined: Apr 2005
    Posts: 4,127
    Likes: 149, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 2043
    Location: Ontario

    marshmat Senior Member

    Mike- your point about moment of inertia is an interesting one... traditional wisdom has it that concentrating heavy stuff near the centre is ideal, thus low values in most points on the inertia tensor.... but to a physicist it would seem the motion would be softer and more comfortable with higher values.... this is probably something for a new thread of course, but an interesting point by Mike....
     
  14. Ike
    Joined: Apr 2006
    Posts: 2,677
    Likes: 478, Points: 83, Legacy Rep: 1669
    Location: Washington

    Ike Senior Member

    One interesting thing I have noted here. When I was younger, so much younger than today.... opps sorry. Anyway, designers and cruisers used to talk about the Length on the Waterline as the important measure of what was the right size for an ocean going cruising sailboat. length overall didn't really matter, and if I remember right, 35 feet on the waterline was considered the best LWL for an ocena going sailboat. What has changed? Sure a lot of design and construction elements have change but the sea hasn't. Waves are still basically the same distance apart and the ability of a boat to ride comfortably is still determined by her length water line and shape of her hull, displacement, sail area, weight of her rig, etc. So why does a 35 foot LWL boat now not meet the comfort quotient?
     

  15. Willallison
    Joined: Oct 2001
    Posts: 3,590
    Likes: 130, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 2369
    Location: Australia

    Willallison Senior Member

    concurr completely with all the recent posts. I guess what's changed is people'es perception of what's comfortable. 30 years ago, so long as your berth wasn't too damp and it was marginally warmer than lying outside on the deck, you were considered to be in the lap of luxury.
    These days people appear to feel that unless their flatscreen tv has perfect satellite reception and the air con doesn't trip out the circuit breaker if it's switched on at the same time as coffee machine, then they're virtually camping!:D
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.