Lee shore gales and lightwinds....

Excellent question

My last boat needed a F5 to get it going properly. I heard it called a good sea boat.

This one goes in F3. It won't carry the cruising chute in more than 10 knots of wind. But coming back from France last August in F7, we just kept taking in sail until she was manageable. Then she bowled along under autopilot.

I know which I prefer. The one that goes in the weather the family want to go out in but is also safe in a blow.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Early days but all replies so far

Chris And others

I probably over emphasised the shipping lane drifting scenario because it was really what I would call the 'pleasurable' wind strength peformance I was looking for, ie the ability to cover miles at a reasonable speed for the size of boat in winds of say F2/F3/F4. I agree in no wind there is nothing that will sail, bit like a 4WD on sheet ice where 4 x nothing is the same as 2 x nothing.

Robin

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>
 
Becky

St Albans Head with wind against tide can be very testing indeed! I went round once in our then Liz 30 in F7 gusting F8 after we abandoned a lads weekend to Cherbourg, it coincided with the round Britain powerboat race and we overtook some of them in the big seas, before the lifeboat got to some of them too! I would doubt (and hope) you didn't do damage to your keel off there though as despite the bangs and crashes it should take that and more. A leak though isn't that unusual so some rebedding/tightening is certainly called for with a check of the bolts at the same time.

Being a bit of a stirrer, why though was there a mess down below? Stowage is something you do need to resolve and have everything held in place even for light conditions, that way it becomes a habit. Just stirring gently /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

Robin




<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>
 
Yes .. I would hope that weather like that would not even start to test a boats structure. I've no worries about weather in my boat from the boat structural point of view. As previously said the hardest weather is to windward. As you know in a F8/9 in the channel on the nose I found it difficult to sail hard to weather with large waves stopping the boat. However on a subsequent occasion in a F8 I was OK on a fine reach in F8 and absolutely screamed away when I bore off to Poole. The key factor is weight with lighter boats getting stopped by large seas when sailing too close to the wind leading to the possibility of the jib backing and leaving you beam on .. not good. So in a light boat I would'nt want to be too close to a lee shore in a gale without an engine partic if the wind starts to head you .. in fact I would'nt want to be in that position in any boat. OTOH in lightish wind I've had a cracking sail setting the cruising chute in the Grande Rade at Cherbourg and dropping it at the forts sailing at 6-7 knots in 10 - 12 knots of wind ... absolutely superbe!

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
The thread has inspired some interesting replies.

I think that the lack off light weather sails on most cruising boats today is a great shame.A big ghosting Genoa can keep you sailing where others have resorted to Iron Topsail.

Now that forepeaks are more like luxury apartments than sail bins people begrudge the space taken up by lightweather sails.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Lots of interesting replies.

I myself went for a boat that I know could handle the heavy stuff and have then upgraded (well still in the process of) to tackle the light winds.

Why?

Well firstly I considered heavy winds to be most dependant on the hull shape and weight, whereas light winds are more about getting us much cloth up as possible. The latter is much easier to fix and you have the benefit you can take more risks in experimenting than you can in the heavy stuff.

The light wind upgrades have done/to be done:

1) new tri-radial genoa and main. Since the main is furling I went for short vertical battens which gives more a "normal" roach
2) Removable bowsprit to enable a Code 0 type sail and furler
3) Folding prop



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Key factors as you said are weight and sailing too close to the wind. A heavy boat will carry more momentum that is for sure and can also lose it all in a big crash stop as well - been there and got the T shirt in our old W33 (NE6/7 going up through Alderney Race). The boat needs to be steered through the waves, in a lighter boat that is more important too I believe. But what is the weight that we talking about? By that I mean a small 'heavy' boat wil be still be lighter than a big 'light' boat, so the small boat will get stopped more readily than the big boat - not weight then but size? I think that a big factor is shape, the David Thomas designed Elizabethan 30 I had years back was designed to win the Half Ton Worlds in expected strong headwind conditions where the windward ability was seen as paramount. It's shape allowed it to 'carve' a path upwind that was hypnotic to watch from the helm but guess what, it was soundly beaten by the Peter Norlin lightweight Scampi! Modern race boats too go upwind in F8 and they are lighter than any cruiser - but they are actively steered through the seas, hardwork for the crew though it is.

As far as engine use is concerned I'm not personally a fan of using it in addition to having both main and headsail pulling. With me it is either sails alone or mainsail only and engine. It is too easy IMO to use the engine to try and point too high for the waves, the result is even bigger slams and crashes and/or the risk of heeling too much and either sucking air instead of sump oil or air instead of cooling water neither of which is a good idea. You can claw upwind at 50 or 60 degs and still get offshore, albeit slower, it isn't necessary to go for 45 degs or less.









<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>
 
IMHO the concept of Lee shore capability and Light weather performance are not/should not be mutually exclusive, however, on the one occasion when it was required Fuel line blockage & S.W.7-8) it was gratifying to know that one had the capability. (W33, small but capable & heavy for size). I suspect that most of us are more likely to sail in Light air conditions and equally suspect that the move towards Roller headsails/ In mast reefing has significantly affected the light air performance of a large number of yachts, that would otherwise have been carrying a sail wardrobe suitable for all conditions! (when one had the crew capabilityy to set them) The impact of electronic nav aids has had a similar effect, in that, most people now passage plan at set speeds, which become an absolute.

<hr width=100% size=1>Tony W.
 
I agree with you RObin, hull shape is a big factor, but as I said before, having a powerful enough rig to keep the boat moving is, IMO, very important as this tends to negate some of the stopping power of the seas. By definition, this also implies a boat with a high enough ballast ratio to maintain a more powerful sail plan in heavier conditions- it does not imply a heavier boat. You need a good hull shape to cut through the seas combined with a rig that can keep the power on to do the cutting.

<hr width=100% size=1>Just enjoy it.
 
Seconded. Years ago I fitted out a fin keel Invader 20 from bare hull. I spoke to David Fetham, the designer, who said it would be difficult to over ballast that particular design. She had a designed displacement of 2,200 lbs with 1,000 lbs ballast in the moulded hollow keel. I started her off with 1,250 lbs ballast but found she got stopped by short seas. I gradually increased the ballast to 1,750 lbs and she went like a train to windward but didn't appear to suffer appreciably in light air.
Obviously the mouldings were beefed up to allow such a modification.


I think any boat, pretty well regardless of size, can be made to drive into steep seas, providing she can stand up to her sail plan. Displacement is not the main issue here - a healthy ballast ratio is paramount, combined with reasonable form stability.

I'd opt for decent heavy weather ability anyday if it were a choice between that and light airs ability because all boats can make progress in light winds (admittedly at different speeds) but not every boat can make progresss to windward when things get tough.



<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Tilman managed to get to some pretty dangerous and inaccessible places in Mischief which seemed to have its engine out of commision most of the time and which if my memory serves me correctly (from reading the books) went to windward like a sack of spuds.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Sack of spuds? I suspect you're being generous! Truth in what you say though and it all points to the old adage that it's not the ships but the men in them. But if your argument were valid, boat design and construction wouldn't have moved on in the last 100 years and we'd all be sailing Spray and Mischief lookalikes - and round the world races would be contested in clones of The Cutty Sark.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Early days but all replies so far

Wouldn't disagree about being able to make progress in F2/3/4 well lets make that a top end 2. This also turns surely on how much you enjoy sailing for its own sake. A couple hours ghosting along at 3 knots in a 2 is fun, for me 10 hours at 3 knots gets tedious. But then we have always viewed our craft as a passagemaker to where we want to get to rather than just a sailing machine. As a consequence we don't steer much leaving that to the autopilot or the windvane.

I guess in an ideal world I'd have a newer design with better underwater profile, newer rig, more internal space, etc, etc but then I think we have extended the debate beyond what is the more important feature as with money you can have both. I think that the real point is that you match the craft you can afford to your type of sailing. Personally, I find it rather sad* to see those with large Rustlers, Bowmans, Malos, etc who rarely leave the Solent, let alone cross the channel.


* for sad read envious.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re:Nor Me

I've never had to claw of a gale lashed lee shore either. Thats because most modern boats have sufficient windward ability to not get embayed in the first place. The fear of the leeshore is a historic one. Boats designed to carry cargo rather than beat to windward, often undermanned and poorly maintained did fear an iron coast. The worst type of yacht builders nightmare would run rings around them.

The secret of lightwind sailing is getting enough canvass up. Forget wetted area and drag. Increasing the effective sail area is what is required, provide your not under a rule.

The same hull can give satisfaction in both situations provide It has plenty of canvas that is easily reduced to a storm rig.

<hr width=100% size=1>
 
Re: Early days but all replies so far

Well there have to be limits and IMO they will be different for a channel crossing than a coastal ride Poole to Solent for example, but then they would be different again for an ocean crossing. I'm happy enough to go at 2 or 3kts to the Solent but not across channel but on an ocean crossing (aside from not having the fuel capacity) would accept the periods drifting, probably because there is no real fixed ETA. We are lucky in our current boat in that she will keep up very good speeds in light winds and this has rekindled the enthusiasm for sailing, it is nice to be making good progress when previously we may have turned on the donk. Waterline length is a big factor anyway and thinking back to earlier smaller boat days 4kts was more like a maximum than a minimum!

As for over specced Solent cruisers, each to his own I guess, it's a bit like wearing Southern Ocean foulies in a summer shower, lots do it.

<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Sermons from my pulpit are with tongue firmly in cheek and come with no warranty!</font size=1>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top