Blue water cruising

[Jacket]

<A category C Mac26x fitted with an ocean worthy engine is likely category B. >

Of course! Why didn't I realise that before now. The only reason a boat is only suitable for inshore use is that its not got a good enough engine!

< Bulbs, I really think, are disproven concepts. They came about owing to artificial ocean racing design rules.>

Um, right. Bulbs are nothing to do with getting the ballast lower down, then? you're back to front. They were discriminated against for a while by racing rules, but now that the rules don't prevent them, they're back in use due to the fact that they're a good, workable idea.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mighetto]

Nothing so mean as calling a vessel OOP - out of production. The X, I like to think of as eXtreme. As in eXtreme sailing machine. The notion of what makes a good blue water cruising boat must be tempered with the fact that no one has ever defined blue water. It isn't a term with a definition as far as I know. There is a definition for the word seaworthy and I think most feel that a blue water cruising boat is a seaworthy boat.

The problem with that is that the definition of seaworthy involves crew competency. A boat that is seaworthy when she comes into port, then is crewed with lubbers, will not be seaworthy when leaving port - by definition.

This puts the whole Category A, B, C, D thing into the realm of marketing. I mean if you assume that Category A means blue water, Category B means that but not self sufficient and then put lubber crew into the boat without training you have done consumer harm. The value of the marking is a crutch that is misleading and potentially harmful is the point. What category A really means is more expensive than category B, and what category C means is less expensive than category B. There is no real meaningul connection to seaworthiness. A life raft or boat is by definition category A. Am I really wrong? I will ponder this over the week end. I am certainly capable of being wrong.

Isn't it a great thing that these X boats are being produced out of the US now. It means the hull never went out of production on a year to year basis. Is not this new power sailer also fine? For those who are use to sailing with a bulb keel there now is an upgrade for them.

There will be better powersailers from a design standpoint and possibly even on performance but there will not be an ocean cruising sail boat as raceable as the Mac26x for at least another decade.

That is owing just to the number of hulls in use today. In another 7 years there could well be 12,000 X hulls in use and ocean races featuring the vessel and better similar designs, with world wide support. It is very exciting. And troubling to those with vested interest in fixed external ballast designs.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Its absolutely fantastic, I've always wondered why everybody did'nt have one as they are perfect for any type of sailing a sort of sailing chameleon if you like. ShipsDog has apparently taken one to the Noth Pole via the NW Passage in a F11, is'nt that absolutely fantastic, true extreme sailing, when the water ran out apparently he lifted the keel and sail sleighed all the way there and back .. yessir .. a true extreme boat... in fact one made the first ascent by a yacht of Separate Reality the roof crack in Yosemite and the same craft onsighted a 5.14 free in Colorado .. no mean achievement ... yup I just can't wait to be one!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gunfleet]

I own a MacG

And I intend to cross the Atlantic in it. I have a worthy ocean engine and shall take spare fuel lashed to the side decks. It is my intention to cross via the Davis Strait, Greenland Iceland and the Faeroes, seeing as I've found such a seaworthy vessel. I only have one problem I can't figure...I have bought an SSB and am about to fit it , Are you or anyone else on the in forum able to tell me what arrangements I must make for a) licensing and b) grounding it?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mighetto]

Of course! Why didn't I realise that before now. The only reason a boat is only suitable for inshore use is that its not got a good enough engine!

I doubt many will take a sailboat offshore knowing they have but a weak engine. This has of course been the subject of much debate. But the fact is that harbors no longer fully support sail only craft and many of the new light designs are not capable of lying ahull or heaving to in heavy weather. They have to have a reliable engine to employ the dodge technique to keep the boat headed into the waves. Of course more worthy for ocean use designs do not need that technique. The X does not need that technique. The big engines provide safety in being able to get to all weather harbors quickly - at least as fast as a 40 plus footer.

Um, right. Bulbs are nothing to do with getting the ballast lower down, then? you're back to front. They were discriminated against for a while by racing rules, but now that the rules don't prevent them, they're back in use due to the fact that they're a good, workable idea.

Historically bulbs are a relatively new thing. Has anyone proved that getting the ballast lower is a good thing? On aircraft designs the weight is being moved off wings and put internal to the hull. This gives a faster and more fuel efficient but less stable perhaps result. Stablity is then gained with other things, like electronics.

The canting keel designs reject the notion that getting the ballast lower down is always good or even good period. If that were true the keel would never be canted. I consider bulbs to be failed experimental designs coming from box rules more than anything else. But this failure is a failure of bulbs on fixed fins. The notion of lowering or raising the weight is one that does have merrit. I could see it providing stabilty in fully extended state in some seas and when partially retracted the boat may sail faster or motor more efficiently. A water ballasted bulb is of particular interest. I suspect that Genuine Risk uses a water ballasted bulb because she is not really slower in doldrums than the water ballasted competition which moves the water off the boat in those seas. Anyway..

Isn't it a great thing that these X boats are being produced out of the US now. It means the hull never went out of production on a year to year basis. Is not this new British power sailer also fine? For those who are use to sailing with a bulb keel there now is an upgrade for them.

There will be better powersailers from a design standpoint and possibly even on performance but there will not be an ocean cruising sail boat as raceable as the Mac26x for at least another decade. 5000 hulls in use makes for lots of race potential. A suggested use for the vessel, according to Macgregor Yachts, is heavy weather racing.


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Absolutely we all know that, there are a horde of scuttlebutters just set off on the 95 strong matched McG26X scuttlebutt fleet on the Round the world scuttlebutt race.. you're preaching to the converted here mate!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mighetto]

Re: I own a MacG

Spare fuel was lashed to the side decks on the two Mac26x vessels that circumnavigated both vancouver island and the queen charlottes a few months ago. Check your long and lats against those for the queen charlottes.

Mac26x cruisers were used for transporting medical and dental teams and supplies from the Marshall Islands to the Republic of Kiribati. They may still be. It is a 500 mile run. The director, shane@moonrakerdevelopment.com holds a merchant marine license, has a hundred-ton ticket, has sailed the world in many vessels including Columbia's and Catamarans and pretty much has proven that the vessel is ocean worthy. He has indicated in Small Craft Advisor that he will purchase one for personal use. Perhaps not ones first choice for your passage as far as comfort. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

But you should be aware that most ocean crossing boats do so in flotillas that are organized as races. These boats often remove all fuel except for about 25 US gal. Comfort is not very important in a race. Keeping weight down is.

The Mac26x is not a trawler, or a motor sailer by my way of thinking. If she were then she would have been designed to cart more fuel.

By SSB, do you mean Single Side Band? <A target="_blank" HREF=http://macgregorsailors.com/mods/index.php>http://macgregorsailors.com/mods/index.php</A> may be of value. The X has a mast that will support the wiring for a mast head antenna. This is not true with the newer M model. Such an antenna is required for entering a boat in an ocean crossing race. I know you may be yanking my chain. But yanky built means something in the case of the Mac26x. Do you really own one?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Re: I own a MacG

listen mate 500 miles pah .. the scuttlebut fleet of 95 McG26x are doing 24000 miles singlehanded without a stop and all of it uphill .. just watch it before coming on here with these todlly stories of garden ponds .. we're real men here and we all do it the McG26X way!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

He owns a MacG

I can confirm that JohnM owns a MacG, for I have seen it.

Named 'Hapless', it is currently ashore in Great Buggering on Ouse, where it is being modified for John's high latitude North Atlantic crossing. Amongst other things, wing tanks are being fitted for extra fuel because these seem to work well on aircraft that follow the same route from London Heathrow to JFK, NY. The windsurf-inspired free-standing wishbone rig is looking good and has been choosen because sailboards travel exceptionally fast for their waterline length, and John can't afford to be away from home for too long as he needs to report regularly to his probation officer and personal coach. Of course if a canting keel is good, a canting rig must be better. John will also be sailing with heavy water as ballast (just as soon as it has been delivered from Norway) because he is not anticipating doldrum conditions on the Northerly route.

Unfortunately work on Hapless has, for the moment, come to a halt but will resume as soon as John has completed the course of treatment and the medicos have pronounced him fit to once more take his place in society.



<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>