Habitable boats

Are we talking about habitability or safety ? Because they are very different issues of boat design. One can cross the pacific ocean into a small metal capsule like the Gemini spacecraft with complete safety, I suppose, may be even into the Gemini space suit, but this does not mean that the capsule or the floating spacesuit are considered as habitable boats, does it?
I suggest we better leave "safety" to the bureaucrats, and concentrate on habitability, which is a real sailor’s issue
.

 

habitability is different for everyone while some people may consider a 28' boat to be habitabal a millionaire might not be happy until they have a 500' motor yacht, it also depends on the type of boat as a catamaran will have more space than a mono of the same size.

 

How can same sizes have different amounts of space If they haven't the other one is smaller and so the claim is absurd

 

About 15 years ago I was at the meeting when the UK's position on the RCD was finalised. The room was pretty full and I counted 33 people.

At question time I said I had some questions but first I would like a show of hands.

First I asked how many in the room were boatbuilders or designers.

3 people put their hands up

Then I asked how many owned a boat of any sort

5 people put their hands up

So the vast majority of people who decided on the RCD (and thus decided on the safety, build quality and all other aspects of boat design and building) did not even OWN a boat!!!

So are you SURE you want to leave everything to bureaucrats???

Remember I started this discussion by asking what people thought were the minimum requirements for "habitabilty", not what they would like to have themselves on a cruising boat.

So a couple of simple questions:

Should a Melges 24 be considered "habitable" - yes or no.

Should a Farrier 750 be considered "habitable" - yes or no.

Maybe it would be helpful if you were to justify your answer.

Richard Woods of Woods Designs

www.sailingcatamarans.com

PS I suspect Little Otter meant length not size. I doubt if any coracle has crossed an ocean. A river maybe. People should read BWD's post in conjunction with my comments above. The RCD is now law and cannot be repealed.

 

In IMS rules, www.orc.org , read APPENDIX 1 ACCOMODATION REGULATIONS.

It describe the "minimum" "habitability" requirements for racing boats.

They are very crude.

For instance a GP26, 7.9m, crewed by 5, should only have 2 bunks of minimum 1.83m * 0.55m. and a cabin headroom of 1.22m minimum.

 

I agree, but let's not forget who some of the other baddies were in the establishment of the RCD nightmare. There were also lots of (predominantly) ship Naval Architects at those meetings (as they could afford RINA conference fees on their expenses) who also thought that there was money to be made from the bureaucracy and the Notified Bodies, etc.

Then there was the BMF in favour and even the RYA who should at least have been defending consumers to the hilt.

Now, 15 years on, there is no evidence that boats are safer only more expensive and with less choice. And we have the ludicrous spectacle of the Moody 45DS being Cat A because it can contrive to jump through all the hoops, whilst proven designs such as the Contessa 26 are deemed to be 'non ocean going'.

 

"habitability" is such a slippery concept to define. It would be hard to think of a more subjective concept. What someone from Sudan might see as the lap of luxury might be regarded as horrific hardship by someone from the 1st world. And even granting citizenship in, say, an EU country, viewpoints vary enormously.

One element not yet addressed is time. If a boat is habitable for a weekend, is it habitable?

Folks will put up with almost anything for a short time. An illustrative non-nautical example is backpacking. There are lots of backpackers who believe they can carry habitability on their backs for a week or two. There are very few who actually can do it for 6 months, which is why so few hikers complete the Appalachian Trail from end to end.

So how long must a boat be endurable to qualify as habitable?

 

I have not measured these boats according to my specific quantitative definition of habitability, but I believe that two of the three numbers I propose are actually zero...So, their total habitability is severely restricted, and this is also the case for smaller, safer, truly ocean going vessels, like the mini 6.5s, for example. Any boat that has some " sitting or sleeping area with sufficient width and headroom on which one can sit or sleep", is habitable, but if it has no standing room space its total habitability is necessary very low. Personally, I wouldn’t even think of crossing the ocean with a Bavaria 33, but its habitability, and this only, is necessary much higher. So we must not confuse the safety, the ocean going abilities or the quality of the construction of a sailboat with its habitability. For me, habitability has to do with space and space only. If one has a hull that provides a high score of habitability according to my definition, then he could proceed and improve safety, quality of construction, etc.
Dayboats and weekend keelboats in general, that do not have a standing room space, smaller than, say, 27 feet LOA, sporting or not, fast or not, well constructed or not, ocean going or not, are habitable boats, provided they are not open dinghies, but their habitability, if measured according the formula I proposed, is of a very low number compared to cruising boats.
As I have said, if we do not distant ourselves with vague qualitative definitions and focus on numbers that one can really measure, even if he is a bereaucrat or politician, we can not define habitability in a objective, functional, useful way.

 

LIfe rafts are apparently habitable, since several people have spent months at sea on them. Some people have also traveled the worlds oceans in small open boats.

Maybe, just maybe, the argument should be made that (given thousands of years of maritime history where people have traveled the oceans in everything from skinned canoes to today's super cruise ships) the premise of "habitable" vessels needing extra safety measures is based upon a very poor understanding of boats/ships and their use so therefore the entire debate is pointless and should be abandoned.

 

Well, I´ll try to add my two cents.
Assuming we distinguish CE class A and B I would call this a habitable boat:

Seating:
Class A..........all crew at the same time below deck (sheltered)
Class B..........all crew at the same time
both..............headroom seated min. 68 cm

Bunks:
Class A...........for 50% of crew + 1 bed
Class B...........for 50% of crew
both...............headroom min 50 cm

Cabin:
Class A............standing headroom at min 1/3 of the cabin length 160 cm
Class B......................... " not necessary

Class A ..............daylight / windows min 0,33 m² per 10m³ cabin volume
Class B..................... " not necessary

Class A.................ventilation sufficient to change cabin volume 10 times
...........................per hr at 2kn wind
Class B..................hand fan (Japan model)

Cooker:
Class A...................1 fixed cooker of sufficient size to prepare at least one
.............................warm meal for all crew within 24 hrs. easily accessable
Class B................... none

Toilet:
Class A................. min 1 Wc per 10 crew (seawater, marine type, holding
............................tank)
Class B...................Porta potty (1 per 6 crew)

Water:
Class A.................min 3ltr. of potable water per day/crew, below 30° lat 4ltr
and B....................in case of watermaker installed, half of that


Just a few points, but we will add some more I guess.

Regards
Richard

 

for a prolonged period i like headroom etc, was looking at your flika early'r how livable it was

 

Of course more is better, and I would´nt like to go just for a weekend trip in the vessel described above, but we are talking minima here.

 

Very interesting numbers, apex1. I think you should add some numbers for minimum storage volume, and increase headroom minima. People are taller nowadays... Headroom for sitting and sleeping could be the same ( it would be great if one could be seated on his bed, because it helps wives agree for the purchase of the new boat...

 

These figures are just what is my personal opinion of the absolute minima. Nothing is good, comfortable or sells easily. But that was not the question. If we put our personal requirements in here, we end up with unaffordable boats. Or as bad, outlawed ones. When I set my personal minima as a standard, and that becomes a written law, I have the blue water anchorages for me exclusively at 99% of the year.
Headroom for seating and bed should not be the same, you narrow the possibility of additional bunks too much.
When a boat fits into these minima (many do today) it makes it possible for a young couple to make extended journeys with a minimum in comfort. If we increase the numbers noticeable half of the boats are out of race.

 

I would consider these habitable for trans-oceanic travel


http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/05/designs/ostlind/stasis7/index.cfm

http://www.duckworksmagazine.com/05/designs/ostlind/pencil/index.cfm