Minimum Passagemaker/Cruiser

I would put it at around 10% for 30-40 knots of wind even on a longer passage. 1-2% for 40-50 knots of wind and less than 1% of 50+ knots. On a three or four day passage, I would put those numbers even less. I am not a proponent of designing for ultimate conditions unless you plan on spending the winter in the Southern Ocean. I am thinking I want to be reasonably comfortable up to about 35-40 knots or so. I like high latitudes.

Its becoming clear than many here think of a passagemaker as boat that can make 400-2100 mile passages in fair weather windows or along routes with historically long periods of good weather. That is probably 90% of would be globe trotters. I call that a damned good coastal boat that is capable of once in a while jumping out there.

I have to concede that from the point of view in marketing, that description is a "go anywhere passagemaker" but that is not what I view as a passagemaker.

I guess it hasn't hit me until now that the term "Passagemaker" is on its way to becoming as watered down as the term "Trawler" has become. The likes of this thread is evident. I guess "Passagemaker" will soon encompass Nordic Tugs and the likes. With that in mind if you can't lick em- join em. Tad's PL 39 is a full fledge passagemaker at least if I were selling one.

 

Wow, you give the same whining answer to everyone on this forum that gives some back showing you for what you are.......... a whining little girl just like my 5 year old niece
And please, point out how I cheated?
You even quoted the bit yourself

What’s that?
One does not need 6500nm range?
Best get your story straight before you make yourself look even sillier

The boat that the vested interest spruiker sell may have 6500nm range or the one that he dreams of may, but this is the MINIMUL Passagemaker thread, not the TRUE Passagemaker thread and certainly not the "I need a larger than required boat to someway compensate for my other shortcomings" thread

Comprehension not your strong suit? The whole sentence that you quoted was "true ocean cruiser has such range", NOT Minimum Passage maker/Cruiser as you falsely claim. Do you lie often?
Like I said, best get your story straight before you make yourself look even more silly, whoops, too late.

Our definitions?
Do you often suffer from the delusion that you speak for everyone on this forum or in the world of boating?
Who are you to dictate what type of vessel shall be spoken of on these forums?
Oh that’s right, you have a vested interest in peddling one vessel and one vessel only, therefore........there can only be one. What a boring world it would be if you had any sort of control.

Says the vested interest spruiker with 6000+ posts pushing one style of vessel
Going on the relentless hard sell I’m guessing business must be quiet?

Anyway, ever heard of Quality over quantity? Your views are one eyed and account for little in my views on what makes a MINIMUL Passagemaker, they lack quality but they have no shortage of drivel.
That, and the offensive and derogatory manner that you address other posters discounts your posts to ZERO in my opinion.

Why? Do you get upset that you are repeatedly made to look the ****?

Perhaps if you stopped being an arse and stopped putting **** on everyone who has a difference of opinion with you then perhaps you will be treated with respect instead of being treated like the total cock you come across as at present.

Now, by all means get the final word in as I know you must, but please, after that, why don’t you piss off back to your own " I need a larger than required boat to someway compensate for my other shortcomings " thread and leave this one to people who are actually interested in an outcome for a Minimal Passagemaker

Back on topic.......

 

You clearly have spend no time cruising the tropics and living aboard during repeated rain, sun , rain.
Everything starts to rot and grow
A/C is essential, on occasion, if you want any sort of comfort.

 

i Know that in Sweden boats under 12x4m are allowed to substitute the usual arrangement with a single red/green/white light in the masthead. boats with that rather stupid arrangement have been hit by traffic.

 

It is the Minimal passagemaker thread
That defines that there will be a budget
and it also says that "some" compromise will have to be made as we face reality

What you view as a passagmaker is not MINIMAL and it is not realistically attainable to 99.9%(made up number) of the boating community

Yep, it is , as are many, comfortable boats that are capable of doing a sizeable passage when the correct weather window is picked, as any diligent skipper would do anyway.

 

aren't you supposed to be nude at sea?

 

Colregs state:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intern..._Collisions_at_Sea#Part_C_-_Lights_and_shapes

 

Yes but its not hard to wash a T shirt and a pair of shorts.

 

Okay hot shot what do you call a reasonable budget?

 

I'm not considering a masthead light for a powerboat. IIRC the minimum vertical separation for running lights is 1M. So the highest location would be the cabintop without having to increase mast height.

Deck level is too low. I think the new requirement/recommendation for sailing vessels is at the level of the lifelines. To guaranty 2nm visibility the sidelights must be more than 3 feet above the water. Deck level lights on a heeled sailboat probably fail to meet the 2nm requirement on the leeward side or in waves.

When I overhauled/rebuilt my sailboat I put the sidelights on the pulpit. Having zero backscatter is a pleasure. The sidelights on my powerboat are at deck level (what were they thinking) and I haven't decided where I'm going to move them, probably on the bow pulpit like my sailboat.

The steaming light is a problem too. It should not illuminate the foredeck at all. There is a range of angles off horizontal that the light must be visible for 3nm, below that there should be a sharp cut-off to prevent glare on deck. I'm working on a solution. Masking the lower portion of the lens just enough to keep direct light off the foredeck cut 90% of the glare. Now all I have is the glare from off axis light scatter. Putting a scatter shield under the lamp should kill what remains.

Stern lights on the transom are too low. I'll be moving that to the base of the radar mast.

I may be too fussy ...

 

something that costs half than the boat you want

 

You mean $200k USD

 

I think you may have them installed, in fact I think installed working backups are required for some vessels. I know that offshore racing equipment rules require a second set of running lights installed that use a different power source than the primary lights.

What you are not allowed to do (and we see this all the time) is have more than one set *ON* at a time.

These cruising idiots motoring with a tri-colour light at the the top of the mast on and the steaming light on at the lower spreader make wonder if I've capsized and I'm the one upside down ... better yet they have the deck level lights, the steaming light, AND the tri-colour all on. Might as well just flash a sign that reads "I'm a *****".

R

 

But those are status lights, sigaling "Skipper is a ********"

 

You have choosen to attack me, instead of contributing here. That is how it always goes when you are around.
Guess who has the "e-*****" problem?
Btw. I am not the only one with 6000 posts, and sure not the only one who has the internet connection running in the background half a day. Even now, while sailing, I find my time to contribute here, whereas you only pop up occasionally, to start a fight with me, you retard.

Learn sailing and learn about the topic, than come back and provide what you have to add.

Richard