Are modern yachts designed wrong?

[Deleted member 36384]

….. Too many people read the old books where the old sailors trot out their love of their old long keel boats and buy into the myth. You should think for yourself and realise that times have moved on. ….

I don't think too many do. A straw pole review on here easily shows that modern yacht form is supported by the majority for all sorts of voyaging. Most of the arguments I think resolve around perceived strength in one form or another; no myth of significance around long keels just passions. Anyone who believes that modern yacht form is not more efficient is just kidding themselves and I doubt that many do.

I own a BMW R100/7 motorbike from 1977. It is unbelievably reliable, a solid work horse of a bike that just keeps on going. It's handling and braking leaves a lot to be desired compared to modern bikes, but I understand that and can take account for it. My friends have various modern bikes and it would be fatal for me to try and expect the bike to perform like theirs, yet we still do the same thing, enjoy the ride, crank the bikes over, arrive more or less at the same time. I like my bike.

The real question is why the need to berate the supporters of long keeled boats. You do this quite often, use your considered conclusions to aloofly decry others; so what I say, don't be so insecure, it demeans your position.

 

[john_morris_uk]

I don't think too many do. A straw pole review on here easily shows that modern yacht form is supported by the majority for all sorts of voyaging. Most of the arguments I think resolve around perceived strength in one form or another; no myth of significance around long keels just passions. Anyone who believes that modern yacht form is not more efficient is just kidding themselves and I doubt that many do.

I own a BMW R100/7 motorbike from 1977. It is unbelievably reliable, a solid work horse of a bike that just keeps on going. It's handling and braking leaves a lot to be desired compared to modern bikes, but I understand that and can take account for it. My friends have various modern bikes and it would be fatal for me to try and expect the bike to perform like theirs, yet we still do the same thing, enjoy the ride, crank the bikes over, arrive more or less at the same time. I like my bike.

The real question is why the need to berate the supporters of long keeled boats. You do this quite often, use your considered conclusions to aloofly decry others; so what I say, don't be so insecure, it demeans your position.

My apologies if I say anything that comes across as a personal attack. It certainly isn't meant to. I have owned and sailed long keeled boats and the only thing I berate are the views of those who insist that they are 'better' for some forms of sailing. I don't think that they are 'better'. They can be good and they can produce a craft with a lovely kindly sea motion, but that is not unique to the long keel and I can't understand why people keep suggesting that it is…


Tis the only reason I keep arguing the case...

 

[Twister_Ken]

Happy to admit that some long-keelers do look absolutely right and they can be beautiful boats. To do, I think, with the shape of the bow and the pinching in towards the stern, combined with long overhangs and, generally, a very sweet sheerline. They may be anachronistic, but certainly good-lookers.

 

[30boat]

Happy to admit that some long-keelers do look absolutely right and they can be beautiful boats. To do, I think, with the shape of the bow and the pinching in towards the stern, combined with long overhangs and, generally, a very sweet sheerline. They may be anachronistic, but certainly good-lookers.

I could never see the charm myself.My father's 42footer Colin Archer type on the other hand had a rugged beauty that always appealed to me.
No,I'm definitely a modern boat type of guy.

 

[pmagowan]

My apologies if I say anything that comes across as a personal attack. It certainly isn't meant to. I have owned and sailed long keeled boats and the only thing I berate are the views of those who insist that they are 'better' for some forms of sailing. I don't think that they are 'better'. They can be good and they can produce a craft with a lovely kindly sea motion, but that is not unique to the long keel and I can't understand why people keep suggesting that it is…


Tis the only reason I keep arguing the case...

Which is better for hydrography by impact, long keel or fin keel?

 

[Twister_Ken]

Which is better for hydrography by impact, long keel or fin keel?

Lead line!

 

[KellysEye]

>I rather think you may be jumping to unwarranted conclusions. They almost certainly were monitoring weather, one way or another. But an Atlantic storm is not something you can choose to avoid, sailing at six or seven knots.

Of course you can avoid a storm but only if you know it is coming. Heave to if it's ahead of you or sail away from it as fast as you can if the track is coming close, we did the latter once which is why I still think the weren't getting weather forecasts.

The only other explanation is they simply didn't understand the implications of a storm on a light weight boat through inexperience. We have sailed in gales in an AWB three times (Greece, Corsica and St Martin) and had no problems but a storm is a whole different ball game and I wouldn't go near one, As I said we avoided one and that was in a heavy displacement long keel steel ketch, it's not worth the risk.

 

[Twister_Ken]

Of course you can avoid a storm but only if you know it is coming. Heave to if it's ahead of you or sail away from it as fast as you can if the track is coming close, we did the latter once which is why I still think the weren't getting weather forecasts.

I bow to your immense experience.

 

[Resolution]

>

Of course you can avoid a storm but only if you know it is coming. Heave to if it's ahead of you or sail away from it as fast as you can if the track is coming close, we did the latter once which is why I still think the weren't getting weather forecasts.

.

I've never sailed in the deep Atlantic so luckily have never had to experience a full storm at sea. So excuse my ignorance, but exactly how do you avoid a storm? Let us start by assuming that you are on a West East crossing and are say 500 miles off from Boston, and that your passage speed in good conditions is 5 knots, say 150 miles a day.

Just how large is the usual area of disturbance of a typical deep depression in the Atlantic, how fast do they move, and with what certainty as to their track?

 

[JumbleDuck]

A practical Channel crossing is at least 80 miles. I know it's only 60 from Cherbourg to the Needles, but few of us store our boats moored to the Bridge buoy, and Cherbourg rapidly loses its appeal as a destination (the phrase "French Basingstoke on sea" appeared during our last cruise). At 5 knots that's 16 hours, at 7.5kt it's 10 hours and 40 minutes. One gets you in in good time for a wash and brush-up and then dinner ashore, the other is a late-night arrival, "thank god we made it" drink aboard, and bed.

I like being on my boat under way.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Which is better for hydrography by impact, long keel or fin keel?

I am not sure that you ought to be testing any boats integrity by using the keel as a lead line.

However I am not sure that a long keel is any much better than a long fin if you do hit the putty.

 

[pmagowan]

I am not sure that you ought to be testing any boats integrity by using the keel as a lead line.

However I am not sure that a long keel is any much better than a long fin if you do hit the putty.

Now that is a politicians answer; you shouldn't do it but if you do a fin keel would be fine as long as it was like a long keel!
You know rightly that if you are likely to take ground regularly you are better off with a long keel than a fin keel. Fin keels may vary from a cocktail stick with an olive on the end to a solid chunk of steel but the closer you get to the long keel design the better you are at taking ground without risk of serious damage.

So, your assertion that long keels are not better at any type of sailing is not true. If you happen to like getting into dodgy areas where you are likely to come into intimate contact with the sea bed then a long keel is preferable to a racing fin. You might think that is a ridiculous scenario but I have sailed many times into unknown territory where the chance of impact was significant but alleviated by the fact that our long keel could take a good knock without harm. I like exploring places other people don't go.

Extreme case? Maybe but their are advantages to a long keel so they should not be disregarded simply because modern designs are faster. Speed is not everything, each to their own.

P.s. The term 'hydrography by impact' was coined by a famous local skipper (sadly no longer with us) in an article in the Irish Cruising Club journal to describe a trip I took with him from Clew bay to Killibegs. We charted a gullet that had not been checked since the chart was made in the 1800s. Judging by the accuracy of the chart (hence the impact). They didn't bother to chart it at the time but simply made the readings up expecting that nobody would be fool enough to attempt the passage.

 

[chrisedwards]

I must support this - long keels, in my experience, are better than fins at some things , in some conditions. The blanket statement that this is not true is flawed. As I have said before the long keeler - the deeper the forefoot the better - is easier to manoeuvre at close quarters/slow speeds, under sail. Some posters have said that they prefer turning circle - well you have not got a turning circle if your keel is stalled.

My long keeler is moored in a tidal/muddy creek. I can get an extra hour (over the non long keelers) either side of HW access simple by skiing/ploughing.

Now that is a politicians answer; you shouldn't do it but if you do a fin keel would be fine as long as it was like a long keel!
You know rightly that if you are likely to take ground regularly you are better off with a long keel than a fin keel. Fin keels may vary from a cocktail stick with an olive on the end to a solid chunk of steel but the closer you get to the long keel design the better you are at taking ground without risk of serious damage.

So, your assertion that long keels are not better at any type of sailing is not true. If you happen to like getting into dodgy areas where you are likely to come into intimate contact with the sea bed then a long keel is preferable to a racing fin. You might think that is a ridiculous scenario but I have sailed many times into unknown territory where the chance of impact was significant but alleviated by the fact that our long keel could take a good knock without harm. I like exploring places other people don't go.

Extreme case? Maybe but their are advantages to a long keel so they should not be disregarded simply because modern designs are faster. Speed is not everything, each to their own.

P.s. The term 'hydrography by impact' was coined by a famous local skipper (sadly no longer with us) in an article in the Irish Cruising Club journal to describe a trip I took with him from Clew bay to Killibegs. We charted a gullet that had not been checked since the chart was made in the 1800s. Judging by the accuracy of the chart (hence the impact). They didn't bother to chart it at the time but simply made the readings up expecting that nobody would be fool enough to attempt the passage.

 

[BrianH]

In no way would I try to argue the merits of one design over another. Of course design has evolved to improve performance but could it also have evolved to improve manufacturers' profits by streamlining production techniques? It must be much easier to lay up the hull of a modern shell than one where hull form tapers down to a sweeping, longer keel that may involve more material and work-hours to encapsulate or affix the ballast component in comparison to the simpler process of bolting on a separately fabricated keel section.

I am thinking of how quickly manufacturers embraced the concept of sail-drive engines - just lift in an integrated motor with drive attached, no more the separately fitted engine and drive shaft with all the work of alignment. Are they better? I dunno, but I once passed on a HR31 that I coveted because it was so equipped, believing they were not an improvement of yacht design, that their development was more an asset for the builder than the owner.

Fashion of any form is a funny thing. We are brainwashed by marketing gurus into believing today's design is superior to yesterday's, which then looks passé. Sometimes it is a genuine improvement but nevertheless today's beauty is an ephemeral thing and we move on to tomorrow's soon enough. Those plumb bows, fat bums and flat sheers will one day look as dated as overhangs look today. All in the personal opinion of a self-confessed, sailing dinosaur.

 

[Tempus]

In no way would I try to argue the merits of one design over another. Of course design has evolved to improve performance but could it also have evolved to improve manufacturers' profits by streamlining production techniques?.

It hasn't improved profitability, boat yards are still going bust, but it has changed yachting from a sport for the very rich to one many ordinary people can aspire to.

As I've just posted elsewhere, I spend 10 minutes a year rowing away from my boat looking at her lovely sheer and 60 evenings per year in the interior. So I prioritise interior space over exterior looks. Most do the same, hence the trend.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Now that is a politicians answer; you shouldn't do it but if you do a fin keel would be fine as long as it was like a long keel!
You know rightly that if you are likely to take ground regularly you are better off with a long keel than a fin keel. Fin keels may vary from a cocktail stick with an olive on the end to a solid chunk of steel but the closer you get to the long keel design the better you are at taking ground without risk of serious damage.

What if I reversed the statement and said that the closer a long keel was to a moderately designed fin, would it would be equally true? I am not sure that the ability to test the depth with your keel is a killer argument for long keeled boats over moderate designed and well built fin keeled ones. We have had the scrapes on our keel from drudging about in shallow water but I am not sure its something I'm proud of. If I want to go and do some hydrographic work in a shallow unknown area, I suspect I would choose a dinghy, handheld GPS and a hand held echo sounder.

But there's nothing to disagree about really. I will remind you that I have owned and sailed long keeled boats. Its only the repeated assertion by people that its only a long keeled boat that gives you that sea friendly motion and therefore is best for crossing oceans that I reject as mythical nonsense. Its the trotting out of the same answers to the old question of 'what shall I buy to sail round the world?' Some old salt in the yacht club bar explains that a long keel is best and the myth is passed on. Its a natural thing. When you sail, you build a relationship and trust in your boat. She's seen you across oceans and you get used to her and you like to tell of her good qualities. Newcomers to sailing read the old sailing books where a variety of people extoll the virtues of their boats (including their 'long keel) and the myth is passed on. Everything in a boat design is a compromise and people just need to be aware of what they are compromising on when they go the old fashioned route. Like many others I grew up reading stories of ocean crossings and I believed all the stories about long keels being best for years. The stories don't tell the whole truth though. Yacht design has moved on and not necessarily for the worse. For example, what isn't clear from those stories is that Sir Francis Chichester's long keeled Gyspy Moth sailed like an absolute dog.

The other aspect of this whole debate is that it is theoretical for most of us. I suspect that the majority of boat owners buy (what they can afford) but more importantly what is available after their search of the market over a period of time. There then follows a lot of justifying of what they have bought (hopefully also justified by their choosing process) but with the compromises talked up and down.

So to inject some honesty: Our long keeled boat was a joy to sail but suffered occasionally from lee helm. Her tacking angle was OK but she tacked VERY slowly for her length not helped by the rudder angle being limited by the cockpit design. She was cramped and living on board was described as 'worse than camping' by SWMBO. All this from an internationally celebrated yacht designer.

However our current longish fin keel boat is very heavy and needs half a bucket of wind to really get her sailing. This means she is 'sticky' in light airs, and that means that whenever she is flying, so are the sea conditions. You can go fast and get sea-sick or you can sail in a few knots and go slowly. There is so much room on board that we can easily overload her with stores spares and provisions. (I dread to think how much the stuff that came off weighed when I stripped the boat out.) Hopefully the new suit of sails will sort a few of the light wind sailing problems out and I hope she can't hear me thinking these thoughts about her as we love her really and she is a very comfortable boat to live and cruise on.

 

[Victoria Sponge]

A long keel isn't great for Thames estuary sailing

 

[BrianH]

It hasn't improved profitability, boat yards are still going bust, but it has changed yachting from a sport for the very rich to one many ordinary people can aspire too.

No, "ordinary people can aspire" to bigger boats, it was never exclusively "a sport for the very rich". Fifty years ago, as a young, impoverished, ordinary person I participated in the sport by saving, sacrificing and self-building. Now ordinary people can buy a new, big boat on mortgage as well as their 4x4s, smartphones, tablets, large-screen TVs and all the other 'stuff' that modern man aspires to.

 

[Barbican]

Like you (John_Morris_UK) I've had long keeled boats in the past, Vancouver and Barbican, loved them both for their virtues, and happily overlooked some of the downsides. Now I have a Southerly and if I were to choose any of the three to get close to the putty, I would choose the Southerly, and if I were to choose one to go ocean sailing I would choose the Southerly. She's easier to sail and has a very comfortable motion, she's bigger and of course that makes a difference.

When I came to choose a new boat I started looking for long keels (IP) longish fin keels (Rustler) Malo HR etc etc. ie as close to what I was used to as I could find. It took a long time and many discussions to come to terms with the fact that I didn't understand the differences properly, and eventually to my surprise (and Southerly's) the luddite in me was overcome!

Honestly is one better than the other? Yes times have moved on, for me at any rate.

I thought your post very balanced, and it prompted me to post this since I agree with many of your views. Not great at getting it on paper though so I rarely post.

 

[pmagowan]

John, I get what you are saying it was simply the assertion that a long keel is not better at anything that I think is wrong. They are better at taking ground and the are better at avoiding entanglement with pot lines. For instance, say you wanted to he a bit far north where there might be ice, you might be a bit concerned about giving it a wack in an aggressive fin keeler. I know this might be an extreme example but it is only to illustrate my point. I have sacrificed speed for other properties a long keel has. To say a fin keel is better in every way is wrong. As for hydrography by impact, I have never hit the ground in my boat when I wasn't expecting to but I do sometimes put her places where it is likely. Exploring is one of the things I like about sailing. I have even used my long keel to plough my way into Portpatrick before the pub stopped serving food.

I am beginning to think the compromise for me might lie with a long fin keel like the larger Rustlers have. I don't think the aggressive fin keel of many modern production boats is ever going to suit my style of sailing. I have seen what happens to them when you nudge a rock and the skipper was stressed. I don't do stress, I like to shrug and carry on! We need to remember that all design is a compromise and that means improving something at the loss of something else. If speed is your thing then modern designs are perfect but they are certainly not as rugged.