TP52s

I knew some real sailors... they sailed a retired 12 meter named "Newsboy" or "Newsbouy"
(It was awhile ago). It had no engine. Docking a 12 meter under sail is not like sailing a Laser...
It takes practice and one works up to it.

If you want to become a good sailor, spend a year without using your engine.
Bring it along in case you get tired of drifting when the wind quits,
but don't use it
to get in and out of the marina. The reason you fear sailing is because you have no experience.
Practice until you are competent, and you will see that an engine is a luxury.

If an emergency is life-threatening, a helicopter evac is better, which makes
your VHF radio and your cell/sat phone the primary safety equipment.

 

Now tell me that wasn't fun

If you want to become a good sailor, spend a year without using your engine. Bring it along in case you get tired of drifting when the wind quits,
but don't use it to get in and out of the marina. The reason you fear sailing is because you have no experience. Practice until you are competent, and you will see that an engine is a luxury.

I am concluding a different approach may be better. Learn to power boat first. Once you have have learned basic seamanship ala Chapmans, if you still have interest in sailing get some instruction on sailing a Tasar. What happens today with newbes is that sooner or later they come to question their sailboat instructors. This is probably after years of race frustration. The discovey that they have been treated like mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed Bravo Sierra) turns them off not only from sailing but also boating. It is a myth that competent sailors ever sailed their vessels to the dock. They launched rowing craft and towed the vessel in, or shot a line. Today's crowded marrina facilities do not allow for this kind of sailing stunt. In fact it is forbidden at Shilshole. I see it anyway but the moorage agreement forbids it.


If an emergency is life-threatening, a helicopter evac is better, which makes your VHF radio and your cell/sat phone the primary safety equipment.

That is only after disaster. The motor can be used to forgo the disaster entirely as this discussion has indicated. Designers who do not strongly advise clients on motor choice are doing consumer harm. You have to think like a jury would on this one. Juries will not be able to see what you do. They will think that a modern sailboat design that does not include an adequate auxilary engine is defective and hold the designer responsible for any mishaps and they will hold the captain responsible for poor maintenance of that engine in a mishap if the engine could have been deployed to prevent the incident. It is also getting harder and harder for juries to see logic in sailboat designs that when the boat capsizes sink. Hence the problem the Olympics have with using Stars as equipment. London got the node for 2008 BTW. I see Stars as a corrective measure. For those trained in the ways of US Sailing Keel boats a Star is a nice upgrade. Sometime after a Star a modern planing design might be moved to. Here is the sad fact.

Virgins to the sport are better competitive sailors than those trained at US Sailing acredited keel boat schools. This is because they move naturally to the motion of the vessel and this natural motion steadies the sails making for a faster ride. The keel boat trained quickly loose there natural God given ballancing skills and sit like sacks of sand actually slowing down the modern monohull and increasing capsize risk. Think about it. Nice chat.

 

That, my dear Migho, is pure and un-alloyed BS. But then, you are the ultimate Newbie, so we'll forgive you this time. Maybe. If you're lucky.
BTW, any sailing instructors out there who have ever been questioned by Migho - you are obviously doing something right

Steve

 

I would rather be at sea in a storm on board a sailboat than a power boat. Who else here feels the same way?

 

Thank You for the Slack

Yes - give me a little slack. I am still a lump of clay to be molded. But soon enough I may conclude that once a sailor learns to trailer he will never desire a larger vessel.

 

I rather be at home in my cozy chair, than at sea in a storm.

 

I'd have to disagree. I wasted enough of my youth watching
TV intead of adventuring. Men are turning into wimps as society strives
to remove all risk from everyone's lives. I welcome the occasional storm...
it makes one a better sailor, especially if he continues to sail!

I'd rather be on a sailboat without power than a powerboat without sails.

The only time a sailboat cannot be used without an engine is
if there is no wind whatsoever.

Mighetto is, and will probably always be a powerboater.
His first response in any situation is to fire up the engine
and drop the sails. When you are racing, that's not an option.
To state that teaching sailors how to sail without using the engine
will somehow disturb their training is absurd. It's like saying that
teaching karate by actually sparring is dangerous, and it should
be taught by waxing cars instead.

Mighetto, if you want to become a sailor, buy a sailboat with a small
outboard, remove the spark plug wire and place it in a glass case
with a little hammer and a "In case of emergency, break glass" label.
Learn to sail by sailing. Sail in all kinds of weather... but get a seaworthy
boat first. Maybe if you had a keel you'd understand why the motor is
not the most important feature on a sailboat. When people like Tripp Gal
graciously offer to take you SAILING, take them up on it, watch quietly,
and learn. Keep going along with sailors until you become proficient
enough to feel cofortable in any conditions even if your beloved
outboard refuses to fire up.

And the notion that there are conspiracies against the MacGregor 26
which prevent it from competing in transpac races is just plain...

http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html

 

I agree with Doug, but if my only two choices were a powerboat and a sailboat of equal size, I would take the saiboat...with a big ol' heavy keel.

 

I'll second the big ol' heavy keel, on my 16th transpacific crossing I was returning from Hawaii to the westcoast of the U.S. on a typical modern sled type boat "optimized" for the race to Hawaii, as part of that "optimazation" the keel was made lighter than the normal configuration, well that is just fine most of the time sailing west to Hawaii from the mainland, but not so great for sailing east back to the mainland. Long story short, we sailed through a piece of ocean that had been pretty angry for about a week due to extreame high pressure (1039mb) and a deep thermal low pressure area about 300miles SE. The wind was 47+ sustained with higher gusts in the 50's, not so bad, but the sea state was BIG and Bad. 'bout 5:30am sailing under storm staysail only, doing 10 to 17 kts., a large wave and a large amount of jetting white water combined perfectly with a big gust and the boat was thrown spreaders to the water, belive me at that time I was thinking about that extra 1,000lbs that belonged at the bottom of the 9' keel, and my cozy chair at home. p.s. at the same time another 52' boat had lost its rig and did not have any fuel ( or very little, and actually had to have some delivered, at I am sure a great premium).

 

I concur! Big heavy keelboat is my choice for a storm. Give me a nice Hereshoff anyday over a "rocketship" (as Ted Brewer puts it).

By the way, powerboating is turn the key sailing without skill. POwerboating is not difficult, it's just like driving a car without brakes. Too easy!

 

Review, lets get back to speed

You've GOT to be kidding me! The Mac 26, by virtue of it's lateral stability enhancing device (read: centerboard), among other things, is NOT designed to be a ocean crossing vessel.

I post only what I believe. You likely do as well. Think canting keels. They also do not provide lateral stability (I think you are chatting about crabbing here). With the Mac26x, lateral drift is addressed by being on the proper heel. Think like the edge of a snow ski here. The hard side chines dig in. It is also addressed with the rotating keel - just like the canters are doing.

A keelboat of any sort, ie with a proper keel such as a full keel of any type or some sort of long keel (like a wing keel or something along those lines). Centerboard? No, not for ocean racing, or even for ocean crossing!

This likely comes from notions regarding water coming in through a centerboard slot, which the X does not have. That case against Bayliner was won by Bayliner in 1996 or so. Nonetheless..

A centerboarder won the first great ocean race. You probably are unaware of how large centerboarders became at the end of the commercial sail or how large the centerboarders from China were. Centerboarders have a long history of both ocean racing and crossing. I suppose this is something I could do more research on. It really is a fascinating history. But lets also recognise the many centerboarders with small keels. Finstere for example. You also have to come to grips with the recent decision of NYYC to go with Swan 45s. Most of these for will be delivered as centerboarders.

Sure, you could do it, but not particularly safely or without a hell of a lot of heeling.

The Mac26x is meant to be sailed flat. This is a fundamental problem for the keel boat trained. In a puff, owing to the flat portion of the hull, the X will heal less when turning away from the wind. This is becuase she starts moving out of displacement mode into planing mode. A basic keel boater wouldn't think of falling off in a puff. They head up, which also reduces heel.

And, the Mac's water ballast is also particularly unsuited for passagemaking, cruising etc. as it not only decreases interior volume but also raises the center of gravity, hurting your stability greatly.

You are probably thinking of the water ballast used in mini-transats that owing to design rules must be placed so that it approximates what rail meat would do. The MacX's water ballast is low in the vessel and to the sides. She actually has stability greater than a traditional keel boat and more similar to a twin keeled vessel. The interior volume arguement doesn't apply to the X model. Most think she is a fixed keel vessel. You can get a shower, head room etc. In fact the boat is over 5 tons by volume, and many are documented vessels.

Now, to explain away the Mac 26 site:

your looking at the Mac26m. This is a less advanced but highly worthy power sailer that sails more like a traditional keel boat. This vessel surfs but isn't meant to plane. Only one good thing came about from Teeters medling in the 2002 drunken boaters case. It allowed the introduction of at least 6 new power sailers, the M from MacGregor and several models from out of country. Prior to the halt of X production there was no market for another power sailer. Seriously 5000 in 7 years. This production rate will not be matched. The expected time period for 5000 hulls is 14 years. This radical design and its rapid deployment is a phenominon that has to be recognized as exceptional.

"Unless the water ballast tank is completely full, with 1000 pounds of water ballast, the sailboat is not self-righting." Too blasted slow with that ballast, plus it lowers your freeboard! Take a REAL stability enhancer. And, by the way, though the boat is self righting, you need the water, messing up the boat's speed and power.

Excellent point. The X model is the only model meant to be sailed or powered with or without ballast. She is the 26 footer that has movable ballast - the movement being on or off the vessel. Owing to that she sports rigging suitable for light air that gives way in heavy air. The M is to be ballasted both under power and sail except when used under power for water skiiing. She is not out of the factory marketed for racing. Allmost all references to racing have been removed from her literature in comparison to the X.

"If the tank is empty, carry no more than 4 persons, or 640 pounds." Ok, so if we want to go fast, then we must not have ballast, but if we want to carry 4 or more people or "have the sails up" then we are s...l....o....w going.

The M is 2 miles per hour slower than the X with the same 50 hp. Most in the Seattle area mount 90 hp motors to make up the difference. You are very correct on the M under sail. To compensate she not only carries more sail on a taller mast but the mast rotates providing up to 30 percent more power.

The X is a very different animal. No capacity limit was ever established for the X except by racing rules which limit all boats of her size to 10 crew members. The manufacturer did not and still does not limit her carrying capacity. However, you do want the weight low in the boat and common sence still applies.

"If the waves are larger than one foot, they can induce a lot of rolling motion and compromise stability. Keep the ballast tank full in such conditions." Wow, larger than one foot compromises stability, that sounds pretty sad...Any proper cruising boat need not worry about foot high seas...

They are likely chatting without sails up. Sails of course provide stability and both the M and X are endorsed by the manufacturer for heavy weather racing. The M has less stability when at rest than the X.

"Most small sailboats, with their round bottoms, have speeds limited to around 5 to 6 mph." Please! I've been on Lasers, heck, dozens of different types of boats are faster that 5-6 mph. Lies, lies and more lies.

most small sailboats are displacement hulls and the length at waterline limits those to 5-6 mph. Of course you are correct about dinghies but these are pocket cruisers.

"This is why racing sailboat keels are deep" Well, yes, the Mac's daggerboard is deep, but certainly not heavy enough to work like a proper keel.

The proper keel you are thinking of likely is a fixed fin keel with a bulb. These are a relatively new invention to sailing and hardly proven better. In fact they are a failed experiment in sailboat design. Prior to the experimental period, work boat crews actually made fun of externally attached ballast of any kind considering that kind of thing a failure of design. I suspect that notion will become prevailent once again. Anyone can though up a sail. It takes a real sailor to reef and or bring it down when appropriate.

Now, about the interior: In heavy seas, you'll roll around and be highly uncomfortable in such large, wide bunks. That's a bad thing, no matter what.

There is a nice floor area on the X that would work well. Most X owners bunk in the V. This obviously will not do. You do not see how a modification could be made. In any case, the average crew size for a Voyaging vessel is two and no one expects to be comfortable when racing.

So, I repeat: The Mac is NOT for cruising or transpac/transat or transocean NO MATTER WHAT.

By the mathematics she qualifies. We did this exersize early in the thread and discovered that early generation TP52s do not have the mathematical ratios to qualify as an ocean vessel. The capsize risk ratio being the main one and being the ratio corrected to in the newest generation. In anycase the X model has been used for ocean duty. There is a nice write up in Small Craft Advisor in the same issue as the review of the Mac26x. She is a proven coastal ocean cruiser as well as open ocean vessel. Crew competency and a mast head antena are the only things needed for the West Marine Transpac, for example. I love this topic. If you want to run through the ratios and compare them to TP52s, I would be glad to do so. But the truth of the matter is that coastal ocean cruising is more demanding on a vessel than open ocean cruising owing to wave form and hazards. If this is news to you then you have been fed as a mushroom.

 

Frank you are Amazin....no wait pathetic. Go back to page 20 or so and down load your boob award. It's only fitting they do tend to travel in pairs.

 

So late. Consider this thread pathetic. I certainly do. This is the TP52 thread after all. If you would like, consider me amazingly entertaining. The TP52 is without a doubt the Edsel of sailboat design. The Mac26x - I am thinking mini cooper. Of course Teeters was thinking Corvair. The X boats are safe for any water. You just can not say that about TP52s. They are buoy racers inapropriatly labled TransPacific. Do you really disagree?

 

You forgot the smiley face, Kid.

Many of us powerboaters are quite skilled with our type of boats, and not all that unskilled with your type of boats. Heck, some of us even wish that we could afford to own both.

 

smiley

but of course. Thanks for the reminder.