Engineless sailing?

[Thirdman]

I have recently been told that my 26 foot yacht would gain 1.5 knots on each point of sail, lessen my sailing budget by at least half, and give me an immense sense of personal accomplishment IF I were to rip out the engine and plug up the aperture. I have always wondered what would happen if I were in ä "pinch"and my engine died and I hadn't the skills of sailors of yesteryear to use Sail power alone to get out of the pinch. Your thoughts welcome.

<hr width=100% size=1><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by bobbya on 24/11/2003 23:54 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[Strathglass]

I have sailed engineless in the past, as the 25 ft daysailer I owned was never fitted with as engine.

But you may find that, now, many marinas and even harbours will now not let you in without an 'alternative means of propulsion'

It is possible to get by with quite a small outboard in relatively flat conditions with little current. Or on a smaller craft you could perhaps fit rowlocks.

Iain

<hr width=100% size=1><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by iainsimpson on 25/11/2003 00:23 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[Jools_of_Top_Cat]

1.5 kts

not so sure about that figure, maybe it is correct, but do you notice 1.5 kts extra when you sail solo as opposed to carrying an extra crew member?

That is some claim really.

just thinking out loud /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>Julian

 

[chippie]

As other posters say, 1.5 knots is bugger all, and the engine probably provides charging as well as propulsion. I have sailed my boat with an engine out of commission and I think that the admirable skills of yesteryear dont fit with the way we live our lives these days. The modern man (or woman) doesnt seem suited to all the waiting that being engineless requires.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[windandwave]

You've obviously been visiting <http://www.oarclub.org> recently! There is a lot of truth in the argument that we've become too reliant on our engines. Anyone will happily sail a 14-18foot boat without an engine, without any doubt as to their ability to do everything under sail alone. (Including those tight berthing situations!) Adding a few extra feet doesn't really change the principles involved: everything simply happens more slowly and with more deliberation required. I think most people will want to be proficient in manoeuvers under sail in any event, either for personal satisfaction (the optimists) or safety (the pessimists).

Having said that, I wouldn't want to go out without some additional propulsion, whether for safety (the lee shore scenario) or convenience (the summer's day when the wind dies for several hours). I suspect the best compromise for many sailors is the outboard: even a small one works surprisingly well on a small(ish) yacht. But to remove an inboard which is already in place seems wasteful: with the cost of extraction and replacement with a 8/10hp outboard, I doubt if your sailing budget would be reduced at all. (Not to mention the aggravation of removing and storing the outboard in situations where it might otherwise be stolen.)

So I wouldn't be too keen on getting rid of an existing inboard. But I'd certainly consider an outboard as an option if buying new - in that situation I suspect that it could work out to be substantially cheaper in the long run.

(Incidentally, one boat where the outboard works superbly is the beneteau first 211. With twin rudders the outboard sits right on the centreline, quite deep, with no fear of it coming out of the water on one tack or another: it can also be pivoted to assist in berthing.)

<hr width=100% size=1><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by windandwave on 25/11/2003 01:57 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[elenya]

No engine will always be FUN, but not always the fun you wish to be having. I spent 8 years with a 26ft long keel engineless yacht. Sailed 20,000 miles in it but most away form busy areas such as uk coast. Whilst certainly building your sailing skills, patience, nerve and abillity to go nowhere on some days, it can be frustrating !!. I now have an engine and am most happy with it. Try not using your engine for a season ( although i would run it to keep it fit!!) and see how you feel, that along with the other comments from people above will answer your question i hope. happy sailing.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Thirdman]

The Oarclub yes! But how I found out about that Oarclub was when I stumbled onto this site as follows:
http://cityguide.bellinghamherald.com/fe/outdoors/stories/153651.html

Interesting stuff me thinks.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[MIKE_MCKIE]

My first boat in the early 60's was a brand new Folkboat with one jib, one mainsail, a pair of oars (sweeps) an anchor, primus stove and a bucket! I only had it for 5 months, but voyaged from London Docks to Lands End & back to Solent in that time, all under single handed sail/man power alone.
As I recall, my father (who wisely kept at least 100 miles oway) called it "character building"! It certainly developed my muscles & no mistake. I was properly cautious, and always had the anchor ready, the tide tables & current charts were the most frequently used item on the boat & I learnt to "work the tides". It was really good fun & as you say, gave an enormous sense of satisfaction. However that was 40 years ago when A) I was young & (relatively) fit, & B) the Channel & it's ports were not infested with traffic like Piccadilly Circus.
Sadly I believe that the prudent mariner should have an alternative means of propulsion in these very congested times, and I also do not believe the 1.5kts gain. If you remove an inboard engine you will have to replace the weight or the boats stability will suffer, so no gain there, and having bought my current boat with a fully feathering prop & now replaced it with a conventional 3 blade fixed, I have certainly not LOST 1.5 kts of boat speed!
Good luck whichever way you go, if engineless you will soon find a need for 3 weetabix for breakfast, but at least you shouldn't suffer from CHD!
Mike

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[vyv_cox]

There was an article in YM last year, written by JJ as I remember, about delivering a large engineless yacht from Brighton to London. The boat is owned by somebody whose name escapes me, well known and a strong advocate of this means of sailing for many years.

The trip was a comedy of cock-ups. They were forced to beg a tow on several occasions to avoid big trouble and finally rammed the lock gates at Limehouse, causing considerable damage to themselves. If ever there was an article to convince anyone that engines are essential, this was it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Evadne]

Having sailed with an unreliable engine recently I can only agree with the above. Many UK harbours and marinas are not designed for sailing into or out of and even if you could, the press of traffic on a summer's weekend makes this anything from imprudent to dangerous. And I speak as one who had to tack up the Hamble on a Sunday morning in August once. It's also rude to expect everyone else to get out of your way wherever you go.
Apart from the skills, what the sailors of yesteryear also had was time, lots of it, which you need if you have to wait for the wind and/or tide at every point and headland; or if you only sail on weekdays when the seas are empty of yachts.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Peppermint]

Re: Certain problems arise.

1. You can't always go where or when you want to.

2. You will need to anchor to wait for the tide quite often.

3. You are going to biff into more things than if you have an engine.

4. Anchor deployment and recovery, getting off the mud if you run aground
and marinas all become a tad problematical.

5. Wind shadow becomes a major part of your life.

All of the above can be overcome and very satisfying it is too. If you sail a boat that is handy, if you have all of the time in the world, if your not sailing in big tides with lots of shipping, if your mooring is in an open position then give it a go.

Check with your insurers first though.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Thirdman]

How do the Pardeys\' manage it?

Thanks heaps for the replys so far. Making me think hard on both sides of the argument - if it is indeed an argument.
But I do have one question: I was introduced to the idea of sailing as a lifestyle option through Lin & Larry Pardeys adventures. So my question is: How have the Pardeys managed to go engineless for the last 30 years, and remain so?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AndCur]

I dont know what of yacht your are sailing but on my Achilles i regurally sail with out an engine. To explain the outboard is in a well in the cockpit and we lift the engine out and store in the cabin and fit the sailing plug. The increase in speed would be about 1/2 to 3/4 of a knot with engine out and plug in.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Thirdman]

I found an old post on this site by a gentleman named Adrian Morgan. I have cut and pasted it for your perusal and would be interested in your reply.
Cheers

Re safety: the engine has been claimed as the best piece of safety gear. But more boats have been lost through having an engine than not having an engine fitted. That is, relying on one, when you should have been more careful. Maria Asumpta comes to mind.

That came from a highly experienced yachtsman who has sailed without an engine for many years and many thousands of miles. From the RNLI statistics on call outs for engine failures, he would seem to speak the truth. How many yachts have been lost through not having an engine? engineless boats tend to contain highly competent, and cautious, skippers

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AndCur]

Just a quick question why would you want to sail without an engine. I cant think of
anything worse or more dangerous than entering a busy harbour on a windy day
just under sail it would seem like a easy way to damage your boat.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[mcgarry1]

sculling oar, if you take out the engine, buy a sculling oar, if you need it you will use it but not with out tiring yourself out!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Thirdman]

Well Andrew, you ask why I would want to sail without an engine? I think I mused why I perhaps would like to "try" to sail without an engine in my original post.
As a somewhat incomplete answer again then as to "why", (and I shan't quote Mallory) well I am as yet undecided hence my original post looking for some guidance, opinion (even if diverse)....and by the way as I have already said, I am very much enjoying the useful and interesting responses and I am weighing up my options. BTW I posted that old thread from Adrian Morgan not as a flame, but as I had read from a different source about the anomaly of sailing accidents of those with engines as opposed to those without.

<hr width=100% size=1><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by bobbya on 25/11/2003 21:12 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[MainlySteam]

Not sure of the current situation, but it used to be that twin engined (piston) private aircraft had more accidents through engine failure than single engined ones. However, statistics like that would not make me prefer flying a single engined aircraft over a twin.

Same with sailboats, I would consider an engined boat much safer than a non engined one. Any statistics with respect to higher accident rates is, like the aircraft case, due to human and usage influences not to any lack of superiority in the equipment.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[chippie]

Upon reading allthese replies I remembered an American yachtsman whom I met on a borrowed mooring next to mine telling me that he sailed without an engine; he certainly knew how to handle his boat. A couple of years later I read that he had lost the boat by being swept ashore. It's like insurance , very handy when it's needed.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

This is a classic case of statistics vs real world.

Single engine aircraft can normally find a place to put down relatively safely, due to the areas in which they fly. Twin engined are used where the safety of twin engines becomes an issue - eg flying across large expanses of water.

I wouldn't fly to Channel Islands in a single engined, though statistics say it's safer

Aircraft with twin engines fly to places single engines shouldn't, so it is a truism, that any engine problem is more likely to be serious.

A simplistic view as you already know, but largely true.

<hr width=100% size=1>Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo