Minimum Passagemaker/Cruiser

I can outside of a minimum passagemaker thread. I think you could make a dandy cat for around 2 mil that would do most everything I want with a few exceptions.

 

Do you see the difference in these two statements?
I have highlighted them in red in case you have difficulty

Again, perhaps it would be helpful if you listed what this MINIMUM passagemaker is required to do

 

I have reconciled your two highlights in a previous posts sabahcat. Its called a cat is not a good candidate for a minimum passagemaker but is a good candidate for a much more comfortable passagemaker. You don't seem to get that as you always come back with some drempt up contradiction.


The reasons I do not consider them a good candidate for a minimum passagemaker have to do with where the cats shine and slow S/L speeds and minimum budgets just are not it.

Cats have higher wetted surface for the same weight capacity. Where they save is in wake reduction at normal semi displacement S/L speeds but that can also be accomplished with a much cheaper long and skinny monohull with a much lower wetted surface area and single engine. The long skinny monohull is a better candidate for the minimal passagemaker title because it can be built and pushed at the slower S/L speeds for less.

Minimal is minimal. Cats make fine passagemakers and their safety records when designed properly is quite acceptable but I would rule them out of a search for minimal. My personal minimal is above what I have suggested here as minimal.

A cat would serve me quite well except for excessive beam.

 

I'm trying to envision how a passagemaker would be used. I might be alone with this view, but I believe I would find the middle of one ocean as booring as the middle of any other ocean. I see the passage across oceans as a price to pay for getting from one interesting coast to another. I would like to spend as much time as possible island-hopping and coastal cruising in new areas.

As a consequence I consider the V-berth in the forward cabin a good idea. I'ts a good way to use this volume. Most of the time when sleeping, the boat will be anchored in protected bays or in harbours. During the passages, when the seastate makes the forward cabin uncomfortable, sea-bearths would have to be arranged midships in the "general areas" with the lack of privacy an acceptable price to pay for a duration of a few weeks per year.

I've never made any extended boat trips, so my view might be totally off the mark. Maybe other people see the passages across empty oceans as the whole point with a passagemaker. In my view it's the possibility to cross oceans, although seldom used, that signifies a passagemaker.

Off subject: Island-hopping from Europe to North America the traditional route via the Shetlands, Faroe islands, Iceland and southern Greenland limits the longest leg to about 1000 NM. These places need to be visited sometime anyway.

Erik

 

Yes indeed Eric. the northern route is home of passagemaker motoryachts. And as you say.....a good boat has sea berths and comfort berths. Up forward is a good place for comfort berths. The problem with using the bow...foreship...for accommodation is that you rob the vessel of valuable storage and watertight bulkhead volume and force the anchor chains, weight, to be stowed very far forward. . It can be done, but I prefer an empty storage space with anchor chains well aft of the stem against the forward face of the waterproof bulkhead and a waterproof bulkhead forepeak arrangement with forepeak deck hatch for all the gear a cruiser needs. Too each his own...

 

Thou they are surely most interesting places, the point missed is the fact that after seeing them like X:th time (not meaning that I have) they might be a bit boring, espacially if the meaning is to go from, lets say, Brest to Norfolk and back a couple of times a year or smth similar.
In the first case (finding those places interesting) most cruisers etc will do the hopping.
If the great circle line btw too places sounds more atractive then you have some 3110 Nm to run and a passagemaker is capable for that.. it's up to each sailor to deside what suits best for him.

A bonus question.. which one of the these two routes has more open ocean?

 

WOW
Acknowledgement of the truth
Cats can make good passagemakers

Dreamt up?
Which part?
Links if you please

Arguably, as will be shown below

And yet I will apparently have as good if not better load carrying ability than the one you proposed
My wetted surface area would be similar as well I would think
My 2 hulls @ 14.7m LWL and BWL of 1.2m
Your single hull @ 14.6m LWL and BWL of 2.7m
Thats pretty close Pierre.

Yet to be proven
You yourself said that your back yard build would be around $130kusd -$135kaud, which is where I reckon I will be as well
I have a structurally finished and primed boat, with engines tanks, shafts, rudders, Hydraulic controls and steerage in fact everything bar the props, windows, rails, plumbing, electrics, dinghy, some internal furniture and finishing’s and shiny paint (but I do have the paint)
To date I have spent close on $67,000 (including shed) leaving $68k to finish….so, I should be looking to be in that ballpark…if diligent

I would tend to agree with you that a single hull and a single engine of similar HP should cost less but your numbers for backyard build may suggest different.

I honestly would have thought it could be done for less……..but then you clearly think mine should be done for more

A lot more.

My goodness, you really have changed your tune
If the start of the discussion re: cats would have been along those lines instead of the shittflinging multi bash that it was, things would have been much more pleasant and productive

And my personal minimal is below what I have suggested here.
What I have suggested here is my wifes personal minimal
She is the financier, I feel she gets a say.

And a mono would serve me quite well except for excessive roll and draft.
Actually, I could have accepted a mono, especially at the rock bottom prices some are going for now
But I would have been cruising on my own.

 

I have not changed my mind one iota. If you had read what I actually wrote instead of jump to conclusions then I might not have thought that you were on a mission to justify your own boat as a passagemaker.

 

Thats OK Pierre
I am not trying to change your mind as it clearly can not be changed.

Nor do I need to justify it as a passagemaker as it has already been done in the real world and I actually provided evidence of this which you refuse to believe and acknowledge and instead threw a hissy fit making unsubstantiated claims that it was a hoax or marketing ploy.

The simple fact that a light multihull can comfortably do ocean passages of several thousands of miles, especially the ocean passages I will be doing, is all the justification I and others need.

 

"What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet."

 

When are you going to get the idea that I don't give the democrat end of a republican rat about a mulithull in the context of this thread. You yourself admit it might not be the best for a minimal passagemaker. When are you going to back off shoving the idea at me that a multihull can make a passagemaker? I answered that lots of times. How many times do I have to say that I BELIEVE MUTIHULLS CAN MAKE PASSAGEMAKERS!Why do you keep beating a dead horse in this thread? You have very obviously somewhere taken me out of context and will not give it up. :!: Move on.

 

Now we have carried on with drivel over whether a cat can make a passgemaker for another 4 pages all taken out of context. Can we get back to the subject now?

I responded with the basic start of an SOR that was open to more suggestions

After which Sabahcat responded.

Why 4 more pages I don't know with agreement like this.

My idea of minimal is minimal build costs and minimal operational costs with maximum utilization of the passagemaker concept.
Anybody?

 

Ah Pierre.
I just had to add to your rep points. Pretty good patience and focus under pointless provocation.

So to add to the SOR.

I guess there is a question of how many crew, leading to how many berths. Forget the solo nuts, and then minimum is 2, so 1 cabin. Although I think that smart folk on passages will run with 3 or 4 people on board. Second cabin can have pullman berths, double as an office and probably be OK for sleeping on passages to be somewhere near the minimum theme.

I'd want a means of having the pilothouse isolated (at night at least) from the light and distractions of the galley/salon. No big deal, just finesse the GA.

I see the high latitudes comment as sensible - you might not choose to go there but still encounter similar conditions on your passages due to a combination of unexpected circumstances. Which to me is the crux of the 'passagemaker' term. The boat has to be able to take some very bad seastates for extended periods without completely exhausting the crew. This rules out a few pretenders and island hoppers for me.

 

For the 1% of time that these situations are likely to eventuate

http://www.dddb.com/news.html

Nice attempt at baiting by the way, but I wont bite.

 

Seems pretty reasonable to me.