The UK should have stopped Eric Hiscock and Wanderer III

[Bosun Higgs]

You're a bunch of old romantics. These days the sailors who do these RTW / southern ocean voyages , as opposed to forum dreamers, take with them whatever modern equipment they can afford. You dont see the Volvo boats doing it with sextants, chronometers, no engine, etc.

Its simply silly, not manly or brave, to deny yourself all the advantages of modern technology because of some romantic attachment to the old ways. What next? Square riggers?

 

[Penton Hooker]

Have a peep at:
http://www.saileastcoast.co.uk/shoalwaters.htm
Some of you will know the name of Charles Stock, a man who did it his way, and surely that is the best way?

 

[prv]

What next? Square riggers?

Yes please

Pete

 

[westernman]

You're a bunch of old romantics. These days the sailors who do these RTW / southern ocean voyages , as opposed to forum dreamers, take with them whatever modern equipment they can afford. You dont see the Volvo boats doing it with sextants, chronometers, no engine, etc.

Its simply silly, not manly or brave, to deny yourself all the advantages of modern technology because of some romantic attachment to the old ways. What next? Square riggers?

Square rigger. Oh yes. Great idea. I fancy sailing on this one:-

http://www.fondationbelem.com/

Or this one:-

http://www.stadamsterdam.com/content/home/index.xml

 

[Conachair]

You're a bunch of old romantics. These days the sailors who do these RTW / southern ocean voyages , as opposed to forum dreamers, take with them whatever modern equipment they can afford. You dont see the Volvo boats doing it with sextants, chronometers, no engine, etc.

Its simply silly, not manly or brave, to deny yourself all the advantages of modern technology because of some romantic attachment to the old ways. What next? Square riggers?

Hmmm, maybe romantic but there is something very liberating about letting the boat find it's own way across an ocean. Closing a coast the yep, fully embrace all the wonderful technology if there are things to hit but in the middle, let go of the rumbh line and spend some time in a world undefined by human constraints.

 

[Nostrodamus]

I think it's the same boat. IIRC he gave it away to a couple of kids as it was trashed on the beach and they got it floating again.

The Pardeys did an artical about the storm as they were anchored there at the same time.

http://www.360cities.net/image/joshua-deck-la-rochelle#34.70,32.30,70.0

http://wn.com/Bernard_Moitessier
How can anyone not want to head offshore watching that??? Gps too useful for words but the rest, optional

Thank you Paddy. That is the boat that was here. Intresting that when she is out of the water the prop is actually on one side of the hull as if she was meant to be twin props.

It has amazed me whilst sailing around France some of the places that the old sea battles took place. They are not out at sea with plenty of room but in very shallow and confined waters. Amazing sailors

 

[macd]

I think it's the same boat. IIRC he gave it away to a couple of kids as it was trashed on the beach and they got it floating again.

It's definitely the same boat and he only had one Joshua. It was washed ashore during Hurricane Paul whilst at anchor off Cabo San Lucas, Baja California on 8 Dec 1982. Moitessier, who was based in Sausalito CA at the time, had been teachng astro-nav to the actor Klaus Kinski. After they'd cleared the debris of trashed GRP boats off the deck, they found that Joshua, though badly damaged was substantially intact. Benefactors chipped in so Moitessier could build a new boat,which he named Tamata (hence George Gershwin's well-known song: "you say tomato, I say tamata..." ) and he gave the old one away as Conachair wrote.

 

[prv]

Thank you Paddy. That is the boat that was here. Intresting that when she is out of the water the prop is actually on one side of the hull as if she was meant to be twin props.

Not uncommon in old boats that were never intended to have engines. Not that that applies to Joshua (I assume), but there are people who claim it results in better sailing performance (at the expense of problematic manoeuvering under power) so perhaps that's why he did it?

Pete

 

[Conachair]

Not uncommon in old boats that were never intended to have engines. Not that that applies to Joshua (I assume), but there are people who claim it results in better sailing performance (at the expense of problematic manoeuvering under power) so perhaps that's why he did it?

Pete

IIRC his mate Henry Wakeham installed a little engine in a few days just as Joshua was getting finished off. So no great planning went into it, more made up on the spot. As was most of the boat, telegraph pole for a mast, galv rigging. After launch he operated as a sailing school for a while, teaching how to sail without modern contraptions like compasses He knew very well how to read the swell after being taught as a kid by Vietnamese fisherman.

At least one sistership exists, I saw one down in Canaries.

Really makes you want to head offshore!!

 

[mikeinkwazi]

You're a bunch of old romantics. These days the sailors who do these RTW / southern ocean voyages , as opposed to forum dreamers, take with them whatever modern equipment they can afford. You dont see the Volvo boats doing it with sextants, chronometers, no engine, etc.

Its simply silly, not manly or brave, to deny yourself all the advantages of modern technology because of some romantic attachment to the old ways. What next? Square riggers?

Some of us have done long passages without, (Those who can) some think it beyond them (those who cannot!) The trouble is the cannots think they can lecture the cans!

 

[dmmbruce]

Eric Hiscock

Back in the mid 1950's I met Eric Hiscock.

He came to our school and gave a talk about his adventures. He was absolutely fascinating. He was witty, clever, incredibly modest, very informative and a very good presenter. Most people there knew nothing about him. But he got everyone involved to the point that the questions went on longer than the original talk.

Some guests had been invited, including my father who had been at the school with Hiscock and they had been friends. I was invited along when they were having a long chat afterwards. He was even more fascinating, but seemed quite shy as well.

My recollection is that he would most certainly have used any modern aid to sailing or navigation that he could afford.

I think it was he who was colour blind. He was certainly albino. This had always been a problem for him at school, apparently, as it was thought that he was therefore weak. So he did the cross-country runs in 'corps boots' (they were heavy leather army boots with steel studs).

A most interesting and inspiring person.

Mike

 

[Bosun Higgs]

Hmmm, maybe romantic but there is something very liberating about letting the boat find it's own way across an ocean.

Like Sir Cloudesley Shovell ?

 

[Bosun Higgs]

. Intresting that when she is out of the water the prop is actually on one side of the hull as if she was meant to be twin props.

called a "wing engine" I believe. Intended purely as a get you through the harbour gates type system as opposed to the way we use engines these days.

 

[Bosun Higgs]

Some of us have done long passages without, (Those who can) some think it beyond them (those who cannot!) The trouble is the cannots think they can lecture the cans!

I'd reply if I could understand what you are trying to say.

 

[BobPrell]

I'd reply if I could understand what you are trying to say.

Some of us have done long passages without, (Those who can) some think it beyond them (those who cannot!) The trouble is the cannots think they can lecture the cans!

I appoint myself to edit the post.

Some people have done long passages without using all mod cons (these are the capable people, the Cans).
Some think themselves incapable of such feats. They are the Cannots.
The trouble is the Cannots think they can lecture the Cans!

End of edit.


They can, and do, lecture quite a lot. The problem I see is that they seem to capture the moral high ground of the debate. In Australia at least, we are constantly being harped at for reckless irresponsibility if we do any activity without using all mod cons, and staying in constant touch with the authorities, statutory and self-appointed.

There was a time when I thought "The Authorities" was an idea Australians would never take on board. I was mistaken.

 

[BobPrell]

The Right to Choose

I attended a presentation by Eric and Susan Hiscock, and they signed my hard-cover copies of Cruising under Sail and Voyaging under Sail. They were visiting Sydney in the steel ketch Wanderer IV, in 1972.

They were modest, inspiring, witty, entertaining and the other compliments Posters have paid.

I believe his view was that yes, there is all the latest high-tech stuff, some of which he chose to use, but there is also a range of cheaper gear that is perfectly adequate.

In his books the illustrations show equipment and fittings that are showing wear, but not tear, and have a lot of life left in them. There is no shame in that.

He said that an adventuring sailor had to be self-reliant, and that meant not expecting anyone to rescue him if he got into trouble. It was one's right to go out of contact with other humans and put this self-reliance to the test, if one wished.

 

[mikeinkwazi]

I appoint myself to edit the post.

Some people have done long passages without using all mod cons (these are the capable people, the Cans).
Some think themselves incapable of such feats. They are the Cannots.
The trouble is the Cannots think they can lecture the Cans!

End of edit.


They can, and do, lecture quite a lot. The problem I see is that they seem to capture the moral high ground of the debate. In Australia at least, we are constantly being harped at for reckless irresponsibility if we do any activity without using all mod cons, and staying in constant touch with the authorities, statutory and self-appointed.

There was a time when I thought "The Authorities" was an idea Australians would never take on board. I was mistaken.

Could not have put it better myself!!!

 

[ghostlymoron]

It's sensible to have as many gizmos as you can afford but the point is that it's still possible to sail without them as people have been doing for years. It's also a matter of of cost/size of boat. e.g. it's excessive to think of installing radar (£2k) on a 24footer worth £5k also there's no where to put it. If you keep a good watch and avoid shipping lanes in poor visibility you don't really need AIS/radar etc and many skippers spend too much time watching their displays when they would be better on deck watching the real world. IMHO of course!

 

[mikeinkwazi]

Practical not Romantic

It's sensible to have as many gizmos as you can afford but the point is that it's still possible to sail without them as people have been doing for years. It's also a matter of of cost/size of boat. e.g. it's excessive to think of installing radar (£2k) on a 24footer worth £5k also there's no where to put it. If you keep a good watch and avoid shipping lanes in poor visibility you don't really need AIS/radar etc and many skippers spend too much time watching their displays when they would be better on deck watching the real world. IMHO of course!

OK I have a personal point of view.
Learn to sail first of all, preferably without a motor. If at all possible do this on a tidal estuary, so as to understand tidal vectors. Learn to hove to and anchor, make sail, reef under way, come alongside (still no motor!) work your way up creeks with a chart and a lead line.
Then go coastal (Its ok to have a motor if one is available!). Now you can use a compass, take bearings, practice using transits and keeping a running fix. Having worked up to 20 miles or so day trips a little night sailing is in order. After a year or so sailing offshore becomes less of a macho trip and a hell of a lot safer.
I confess, I started sailing this way in 1970 and after the first 10000 miles, including a transatlantic crossing with no more than a compass and a sextant, I got my GPS in 1995 and loved it! Now I would not be without one, yet if all the electronics go down I can cope. End of old man rant.

 

[Woodlouse]

Not uncommon in old boats that were never intended to have engines. Not that that applies to Joshua (I assume), but there are people who claim it results in better sailing performance (at the expense of problematic manoeuvering under power) so perhaps that's why he did it?

Pete

Wing props were not uncommon as you say. They often result from either not wanting to cut an aperture out of the rudder, or because the sternpost is not big enough to take a stern gland without it effectively being cut in half.

For Moitessier I think he probably found it easier to drill a hole than take a gas axe to the rudder.

You still see the occasional wing prop on rebuilds. Most notable I think is probably Lulworth.