When I look back over better than five decades of offshore sailing (most of it as skipper) and many voyages to hazardous places, I often cringe at all the mistakes I made.
On pretty much every voyage (perhaps save one) I made at least one mistake that could have resulted in losing the boat or even killing me and the crew.
And then there are all those seemingly trivial mistakes, too many to count. Each was trivial in and of itself, but I can see any number of ways that a sequence of these small mistakes could have added up to disaster.
So am I some dangerous yahoo? Nope. You just have to read this site for a while to know that.
And my actual track record (so far) is pretty good. No boat losses, never been towed1, never been rescued, never hurt a crew member or myself…OK, there was the time I stood up fast under the boom, but that was clumsiness2, not poor seamanship.
So how can a guy who has made so many mistakes end up with a good safety record…touch wood? Five reasons:
I have:
- Been relatively lucky. I can think of at least a couple of occasions where it was pure blind luck that saved me from a horrible situation.
- Been diligent about maintaining my boats.
- Always kept one of John Vigor’s black boxes aboard and tried hard to always keep it full of points.
- Tried hard to recognize my mistakes and learn from them.
- Learned over the years (often the hard way) to balance desired features against forgiveness when buying boats and gear, and to be ultra-aware when I have put the former before the latter.
It’s the last one I’m going to explore in this article.
We Will Make Mistakes
But first, are mistakes inevitable? To me at least, it’s an undeniable truth that voyaging under sail is a mistake-prone activity. There are just too many variables of weather and situations for any of us to manage for long without making at least some mistakes.
And this is particularly true when sailing shorthanded because of the number and diversity of the tasks each crew will have to execute in the run of a voyage, and further because from time to time we will get tired.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating for just resigning ourselves to mistake-cursed cruises. There’s a lot we can do to reduce the number of mistakes we make: practice, checklists, systematically and gradually learning our trade, and not taking on cruises that are beyond our experience level, to name just a few. However, for this article let’s assume we did all that stuff.
Forgiveness Reduction Examples
So now we know that mistakes are going to happen, let’s have a look at some examples of boat and gear buying decisions that will increase or decrease the chances our boat will forgive us when we make a mistake:
I was pleased to see, at the last Annapolis sailboat show, that at least a few manufacturers have clued in to this “forgiving & maintainable” philosophy. A number of boats marketed as long-range cruisers did indeed have slab reefing with a slippery track, keel bolts accessible for inspection, good ways to rig preventers, anything that could jam or break being designed so you have an alternate way of getting it under control, and engine hatches shaped so you could easily swing a large tool on all sides of the engine when opened up.
It’s far from universal, though. There are a *lot* of boats that are built to look good at the dock, and be fun to sail for an afternoon, with little or no thought given to taking care of them or to how you’ll handle them in a severe weather situation.
And, even though I’m (at least nominally) qualified to design these things from scratch, I’d have had a difficult time noticing the difference were it not for everything I’ve learned here at AAC. It sure isn’t discussed in the standard engineering textbooks.
My own boat scores fairly well on most of John’s points. Even so, we’re constantly reminding people to stay clear of the traveller & mainsheet, and roller reefing the genoa in a good breeze is far from ideal.
Things to keep in mind for future designs….
Hi Matt,
Good to hear that you found good stuff at the show, particularly since I was pretty disturbed by what I saw in 2019, other than one or two boats. And thanks for the kind words about AAC, much appreciated.
I would add uncluttered and neatly stowed below. Able to performance the basic ADL’s (activities of daily living) safely and conveniently.
Hi Randall,
Absolutely. The huge interiors we are seeing are crazy. Nothing more unforgiving than a bad fall at sea.
One of your best articles here John. They should print it in Cruising World magazine.
For us this article will be a good tool for regular audits of our boat’s configuration and our handling technique to be sure we are maintaining a safe and sensible approach for our sailing time on the boat.
Thanks for putting the time into this.
Hi Bob,
Thanks for the kind words, much appreciated, particularly considering your experience.
John, sorry for the off topic but since you mentioned the Dragonfly 32,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0gRgbqeJcM&t=101s
No worries if you remove this comment but thought you might like the link. I think they hit a home run with this boat for the audience it is intended for. I retire in 3 years, we’re saving money, and maybe (just maybe) if one comes up on the used market in 3-5 years!
One last thought that might add to this article and it’s relevant to performance cruisers (whether multihull or monohull) that can easily sail at double digit speeds. The Dragonfly 32 tri like my wife and I own has been clocked at over 20 knots of boatspeed and in our ownership we have maxed her at 16 knots (and admittedly with just the two of us, it felt “edgy”). Seamanship includes slowing down a boat to a safe and manageable speed for the crew on board even in relatively benign conditions (say under 20 knots of wind). Last year during a crossing of the upper Gulf of Mexico with just the two of us, I was on solo night watch broad reaching in 8-10 knots of wind with full main and jib at 7-8 knots boatspeed. The breeze slowly built and held at 18-21 knots resulting in the boatspeed increasing to 12-13 knots. I ended up putting the 2nd reef in the mainsail dropping the speed back down to 7.5-9 knots. It felt much safer and per John’s points, the boat became a lot more forgiving for me as the inevitable fatigue during or towards the end of a solo night watch occurs.
Hi Bob,
That’s a great example of smart sailing and keeping things forgiving.
For others: Bob is a very experienced multihull racing sailor at the top level so he is better qualified than most of us to push it, and yet he doesn’t. We can all learn from that.
I like speed on passages. So, the way I’ve been thinking about this from “forgiveness” perspective is this: If you keep the boat simple, light and it was designed to be relatively fast, you can sail it well below its designed abilities, and thus with lower risk to boat and crew, but still it will be faster than most, possibly with substantially reduced loads (e.g., less risk of breakage). It also can mean you can get away with a smaller boat, e.g., easier short handed and less expensive with almost similar speeds. (This is particularly the case with tris.) But I’m interested in hearing push back on this. It’s obviously case specific and won’t work when you’re preparing for a high latitude expedition. But when I look around most marinas, there are so many boats that aren’t expedition boats but that look like a nightmare to sail because of all the stuff on the decks or down below.
I guess the other thing I’d add as a plus for lighter and fast hull shapes: If you did make a mistake and have too much sail area up, and if you have ocean room to bear off, your apparent wind speed will likely drop more than a heavier traditional boat because the boat speed. This makes it easier / safer to get the reefs or furler in. That’s what it feels like in my experience. So that’s a “forgiveness” that works in one situation but maybe not another where a traditional boat will be more forgiving. Again, I’m open to push back on this. But this is based on some of my experiences.
Hi Tom,
I agree, having a boat that is relatively fast, and keeping her that way adds to forgiveness. Over the years we actually took weight and clutter off the McCurdy and Rhodes 56, rather than adding it, and even though we sailed her conservatively we made fast passages, which is good too. The less time we are out there, the less likely it is that we will get tired and screw up, or get caught by really nasty weather.
That said, moderation is important. Very light boats, particularly ones with asymmetric ends, can be very uncomfortable at sea and therefore make us tired, which is not forgiving.
Absolutely. Speed gives you options to not get into trouble in the first place. Steve Dashew made that a core part of his design philosophy, and I generally agree with it.
A good example from the opposite end of the spectrum is the MacGregor 26. It’s known as a very forgiving beginner boat, in part because it carries enough engine power to do 20+ knots – if you misread the weather and are about to get caught in squall conditions beyond your skill level, you open the throttle and you’re in a safe harbour in under half an hour.
In answer to your quiz question I am struggling work out what mistake is not already covered by your listed points.
From the bow aft:-
The hanging CQR -better modern solutions available and why isn’t it secured?
The deck box/coolbox.
The Kayaks.
The massive outboard motor.
The expensive dorades lying loose on the deck and some kind of cradle on the side deck.
The RIB lying athwart the deck blocking access forward – even in harbour access to the bow can be critical.
The fuel tank for the outboard propped up vertically.
The winch handle left in a winch.
No mainsail cover.
The shamefully unseamanlike appearance of what underneath all the mess looks like a nice boat.
The answer must be hiding in plain sight and I will feel foolish when you reveal it.
Surely they are not planning to go to sea like that.
FWIW The spare cordage hanging from the granny bars is neatly coiled.
Hi Mark,
You got it, the CQR was what caught my eye, although all your points are valid. That anchor is famous for slow setting, when it sets at all, particularly when loaded immediately after dropping. Not forgiving at all, and no reason for it given that we have had anchors for over 30 years that will set consistently in their own length.
Thoughtful post John thank you.
I wonder how should we judge forgiveness vs performance of the intended task?
For example, yes our low cut blade jib is unforgiving in it creates a small blind spot upwind. But the blade aspect gives us performance to sail well where a higher cut jib would mean we would be really underpowered in 10->15 knots and we would need to motor sail more. Under 10 knots we run our Code 0 upwind.
AND the blade is forgiving compared with the 140% genoa that came with the boat. This had a larger blind spot and our blade means we aren’t struggling with a large rolled up genoa in 30 knots and putting lots of strain on the furling gear. We are beautifully balanced going upwind in 30 knots with three reefs in the main and full 100% jib.
Overall could we see our blade jib as more a forgiving characteristic than an unforgiving one…?
Hi Rob,
Sure, we need to balance these things. But, at least in my eyes, the undeniable advantages of a blade are features, and have no bearing on forgiveness. There are few worse disasters than a collision at sea. That said, sure, a low cut 140% is even worse, but that does not make a smaller blind spot forgiving.
That said, I’m a huge fan of blade jibs.
Hi John,
A vastly under-appreciated area to evaluate when choosing a boat: I have, for years, described Alchemy as a boat that is much stronger and smarter than I am and one that forgives a multitude of errors. Because I have made most of them.
My best, dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Thanks for this article! I ve just bought a small cruising boat (an LM 30) and have had the grenoa roller jam up three times in rough seas! Trying to do everything right but it s been really unforgiving ( not much fun doing a rethread on the nose of a pitching yacht!!) Peter
Hi Peter,
That definitely should not happen. I have not had a roller furler jam in 40 years and a lot of miles. Probably time to take the whole thing down and give it a really good going over. Also check for a set up that promoters halyard wraps. More here on checking over a roller furler: https://www.morganscloud.com/2022/04/18/cruising-sailboat-roller-furler-and-track-inspection/
And if in doubt replace it. I have had good luck with Harken.
In continuing to ponder about this great topic I found myself thinking this:
It will be useful for me to triage forgiveness characteristics into three categories:
Traits of the yacht’s design, which can not be changed by mere mortals: Bulb keels with protruding noses. Heavy weather helm of unknown provenance
Layout and build features which can be changed, but may entail a ‘project’ of some magnitude, greater or lesser: Adding a safety rail in front of the cooker stove. Improving deck organization of jack lines.
Setup and organization that can improved with immediate time and effort, but little-to-no tools, sawdust, or cure times: Moving the right-now tools from a soft bag hung just above the skipper’s bunk! Moving the main halyard from the cockpit back to the mast where winch and cleat already exist, reducing clutter and friction while improving ergonomics.
Hi Randall,
I think that’s a great way to come at it. Makes the whole thing more manageable to think about.
The inverse is also true
Look at how many risk takers such as race car drivers die in mundane ways as if they have used up all their points doing hazardous things
Keep it simple and sturdy. A good and valuable article John, thanks.
Your article brought to mind that in a challenging situation the Skipper has to make good decisions.
I was knocked to the deck by the boom on a Swan 51. The owner was at the helm playing chicken with a freighter. Technically I was the “Skipper” and had issued a warning, to no avail.
The lesson I learned; is to establish safety protocols from the start, no matter who owns the boat.
My current project will be a major simplification of systems on board as much of my planned sailing will be solo.
Viv
Hi Viv,
Yes, that’s a very good point that in our world of amateur sailing it’s can be very difficult to keep lines of authority clear. I have been thinking about an article on just that.
My God this is a brilliant article. Thanks so much for writing it. So much great seamanship packed into one short article. Please submit it for wider readership in one of the few remaining sailing magazines that have a large readership.
Hi Paul,
Thanks very much for the kind words, much appreciated! Makes it all worth while.
I hear you on the idea of a wider audience, but I gave up writing for the mags 20 years ago when they started treating writers like shit, paying peanuts, and demanding we sign contracts that were the most predatory I have ever seen, including demanding that we transfer all rights.
I’m also guessing that much of the remaining readership of most of the mags wouldn’t get it anyway.
Mainsheet during jibe. These are well known and were not from contact with the boom. As you say, probably many more. I like the old saying that “mainsheet men hop on one leg.”
Low cut jibs. My F-24 has one, but it’s a little boat. I had a self-tacking blade on my PDQ; after getting brained by the tackle and finding it flawed in terms of balance, I put it away, not to come out until I sold the boat 15 years later. I switched to a relativity high genoa, that was very high when roller-reefed as a storm sail. I will also add that I learned to dislike self-tacking jibs in general. They can come across when you don’t expect and are very difficult to trim correctly on any thin other than a windward course. Better to learn to the many tricks of efficient tacking; there is very little or no grinding if well timed.
I’m going to comment on twin rudders. In the case of my PDQ I had two rudders protected by two keels. A floating log slid under one keel and bent the rudder shaft. The short story is that I disconnected the link and finished the cruise with one rudder. However, if there is no keel in front of the rudder, I think I agree; the greatly increased chance of damamge outweighs the redundancy or having two.
Multihulls: I started with cats not unlike those they race in the Olympics. Twitchy. I then had a slightly less twitchy fast cat, and then a cruising cat. Now I sail a trimaran. It’s more forgiving yet still fast. Is it as forgiving as a monohull with similar speed potential? I would say different, since the sail area required to drive any boat fast makes them weird. I normally sail slow :).
Clutter. They can’t get to the anchor and handling gear?
Running off. My rule of thumb (unless I’m day sailing and feeling sporty!!) is to carry no more sail than I can carry up wind. It might not be the same sails (more reefs in the main, bigger headsail) but the area is about the same. It’s all well to assume you can reef down wind, but s__t happens. It’s good to have another possibility.
—
I’ve never been towed or asked. No injuries. I keep points in the black box and … I think luck made the difference a few times. After completing a particularly committing and difficult ice alpine route in the Rockies, with no realistic hope of rescue or assistance, I told my partner that I was not ready for that route before just then. I was 45. It took that long to build the skill set. What you are doing has inherent risk, so you have to learn how to efficiently take as many bullets out of the gun as possible, without the whole safety thing becoming ungainly.
Hi Drew,
Good point on twin rudders on a cat, I was referring to monos. I also share your dislike for self tacking jibs, and don’t get me started on jib booms.
Another factor with low cut jibs is that the leads require a lot more adjustment to control twist, both when roller-reefed and even when eased on a reach. Self-tacking jibs can have a track, but friction is a constant problem. On my F-24 the only way to get the shapes I want are with 3D leads. All of these mean more strings, which generally means more tripping hazards. My F-24 is a tripping nightmare, with deck cluttered by lead adjustments for both the jib and reacher, so many lines led back to the cockpit. The high cut jib on my PDQ required none of this clutter, and only the occasional attachment of a removable twing when going deep (mostly for the cruising chute).
Hi Drew,
Good point. I’m fortunate that on the 109 the strings I need to shape the jib are not where I walk. That does mean that I have only an inhauler and no Barber hauler. Anyway, I agree on the benefits of high cut jibs, which is one of the many reasons I favour a cutter for extended distance cruising: https://www.morganscloud.com/2015/09/17/12-reasons-the-cutter-is-a-great-offshore-voyaging-rig/
Intersting Drew,
We don’t experience this issue either, with our 103% blade jib on a 14.5m monohull. Our jib sheets inside the shrouds on a short fore & aft track with adjustable car. The original genoa track remains but is unused. We then have two lazy sheets (one each side) lead to short fore & aft tracks attached to our cap rails, over and outside the lifelines, and outside the shrouds for off-the-wind work.
The lazy sheets remain permanently attached, and to keep things simple, each car can be manually adjusted fore & aft, as in practise they rarely get moved, as we carry full jib to 30 knots of true wind even close-hauled.
In the cockpit, we have cheek blocks with lock-off which allows easy interchange between jib and lazy sheet as we move between inboard / outboard jib settings.
In 10 years of use we have never had a problem with sheet snags, and have pretty good sail shape on every point of sail – we don’t race anymore!
I was really interested in a previous post by John discussing the advantages of in-haulers on their J109, but decided the extra deck clutter wasn’t worth it for us.
I’m reading this post from my hotel in Reykjavik, having just finished a coastal cruise of south Greenland and then a crossing of the Denmark Strait. I had the pleasure of sailing for the second time on Valiente, Seil Norge’s 70’ steel cutter. There are many many unforgiving aspects to her, including 40 ton displacement, enormous sails, in-boom furling, lack of a properly rigged preventer and plus a big RIB and storage boxes on the foredeck. Her bow thruster and windlass are hydraulic, and then engine needs to be in neutral to send full power to the hydraulic pump. She has a lot of prop walk in reverse. On the plus side she has high rails and a protected cockpit.
Her safety record so far as I know is very good and I think that comes down to the experience of her skippers and co-skippers. The least forgiving thing is the in boom furling. It’s ideal to have six crew for furling the main-three at the mast, one helming and two in the cockpit for managing the main halyard and furling line. If the roll in the boom is too far forward or back or too loose the sail won’t fit in the boom. It would be very very hard for a typical crew to put in a reef at night, near impossible in a sea state.
And yet, with her steel hull, enclosed heated wheelhouse, all-electric galley, two bow and one stern anchors and commodious storage she is a wonderful boat for Arctic waters expeditions. I don’t know of another yacht that spends more time in the Arctic and involves the guests so extensively in her sailing.
Hi Joshua,
Yes, I think you are right, Valiente is highly unforgiving, but the pro crew make up for that with skill. You see the same thing on traditional sailing vessels like big schooners, many of which are potentially lethal, but the pro crews do an amazing job of keeping the newbies safe—always amazes me.
That said, if putting together an expedition vessel I would be in the same camp as Skip Novak and Hamish Laird: keep things simple, slab reefing, inflatables that are always struck below for passages, etc, very much as we did on the M&R 56.
One thing, I don’t regard prop walk as a bug, or unforgiving, rather I think of it as a feature: https://www.morganscloud.com/2017/06/14/coming-alongside-docking-maneuvering-in-close-quarters/
John my good man. I concur with others. What a marvellous conceptual way of summing up safety in sailing. All roads seem to lead to it. That, and the mysterious black box. Well done!
Hi Paul,
Thanks for the kind words, much appreciated. Your, and others, comments will encourage me to continue to take on this kind of article, which is time consuming and challenging to write.
The concept that risks, or mistakes, can be avoided has been put to bed in most industries, but it is a relatively recent thing. The belief that an incident free space was possible has been ingrained for decades, despite the flat lining of incident statistics which consistently fail to trend to zero. There are two concepts now in safety application that have taken hold: Failed Safe and Failed Lucky. It is now common that organisations that have mature safety cultures believe that incidents will happen, they can’t be avoided, humans are fallible, processes are imperfect and machines unreliable.
If an incident happens, you want the consequences to be controlled. Your series of articles on preventing persons overboard, through jackstay and tether design, is a great example of failing safe when applied. Keeping with this example, loose, sloppy, side deck jackstays will not prevent a person from falling overboard. Maintaining a lead acid battery in a LiFePO4 system., that powers mission critical equipment could also be a good example of Fail Safe.
Unfortunately, there are many psychological barriers to acting in a safe way, to appreciating that risks exist, and managing those risks such that they fail safe. Psychological Safety is associated with eliminating barriers that prevent individuals from having the confidence to speak up about unsafe practises, that empowers leaders to listen, review, feedback and act where appropriate. This also applies to ourselves, why do we not think about risk, or why do we think that our way is acceptable. For example, I shared your ideas on jackstays to a fellow sailor who dismissed them, saying that he would fall down hill, would never used the low side to move forward and thought that the risk of clipping on and off to get from cockpit to coach roof centre jackstays was too risky; His current arrangement is fail lucky. I found it incomprehensible that the status quo was defended. I could understand if he had said that he understood, but for whatever reason he was staying with his system. However, all was not lost, as now there is information that has been shared, so awareness of the risk (jackstays and falling overboard) has increased, even if only subconciously.
The point I am making is that we should all practise active risk assessment (mentally or in writing), actively think about the risks and consider controls to limit the consequences, should that risk happen. It takes a degree of mental discipline, and it does not always have to result in significant physical changes, but awareness of what could happen and how you will deal with it, could just be good enough to Fail safe.
Hi Alastair,
Great comment, thank you. The concept of fail safe as against fail lucky is a new way of thinking about it for me, and a very good one that really got me evaluating some of my own decisions. (I edited the last words.)
Thanks for correcting that mistake. Appreciated. I find so much of what you write very supportive of practical risk assessment. It is refreshing and why I subscribe.
Hi John,
Great topic and great explanation.
I have long enjoyed sailing traditional boats and I realized a while ago that the reason is that they are very demanding to sail which unfortunately correlates pretty well with unforgiving. I find this quite engaging and rewarding when you do a good job. However, they are anything but forgiving so you need to really think things through and have a crew that works really well together. Unfortunately, the number 1 reason I had to fire crew would be that they were a safety hazard. Some people just were not up to the job and for the safety of everyone else, this had to be dealt with even though I felt terrible whenever doing it and worked hard to avoid it. An example was a crew member who was afraid of belaying a line despite lots of 1:1 work with them so they always had too many turns which would then jump off when slipping it and leave the line paying out with no control. Since these lines might be something like a peak halyard on a gaff that weighs thousands of pounds and is being lowered above someone’s head as they walk the boom, that just cannot be tolerated.
Getting the balance of forgiveness right is definitely tricky. I get uncomfortable whenever anything goes wrong and people immediately say something like “there is nothing they could have done”. Had they chosen a different boat or outfitted it differently, it may well have resulted in a different outcome. I guess what I am looking for is whether people are taking reasonable care in this in the way you describe. I guess I would define reasonable care as getting educated on the subject (which in sailing takes a lot which is both the draw and a downside) and then forcing themselves to think critically about how to balance all of this.
My latest screw up was anchoring under sail solo in about 30 knots of wind with 2 reefs in the main. I could see that there was current against the wind but didn’t realize how strong it was and I also didn’t realize that just ahead of where I would drop the hook there was a big windshadow. As I was paying out chain I could see it starting to lead aft after it hit the bottom and didn’t think to immediately raise it which was the 2nd opportunity I had to avoid this. Once I had laid the chain and the boat fetched up, it spun the boat to the current filling the main and sending the boat wildly charging off. I crept along the side deck and was able to put the helm hard down and locked it before the boat gybed which left us in a stable position where I could claw the main down. What saved the situation was an anchor that held at short scope with huge direction changes (there was shallow water nearby), a boom that was high enough that I could crawl aft safely, clear decks and a reefing setup that let me claw the main down most of the way despite being on a run. Had the boat gybed, I would have been thankful for the nylon traveler lines and strong rig. Pretty frustrating to me but it ended up okay due to the boat being forgiving both by design and by the way I have outfitted it.
Eric
Hi Eric,
Yes, I think it’s really interesting to learn from how the pros keep people safe on big traditional vessels. Some months ago I had the privilege of sitting next to Capt. Watson of Bluenose II at dinner. As you know she is one of the biggest schooners still being actively sailed, with a huge rig, including topsails. The amazing thing is that he sails the boat with, aside from the mates, bosun and engineer, a crew made up of young people who sign on for the season, many of whom are new each year! A true example of amazing seamanship. And then they take passengers sailing who must be watched carefully to make sure they don’t step into harms way.
I was interested to learn from Watson that he is a hawsepiper having started on Bluenose as a young man and worked his way up through bosun and mate’s positions under several skippers, while going to school to get his tickets. I suspect this process is much of the key to the boat’s good safety record. Point being, the less forgiving a boat is, the more we must learn our trade deeply. And further, a really good skipper can make a fundamentally dangerous situation, in this case inexperienced crew on a deeply unforgiving boat, relatively safe.
And I totally agree with you about getting uncomfortable with “there is nothing they could have done”. I have never screwed up without looking back and seeing several ways I could have fixed the situation better and sooner than I did, or even avoided it all together. Good on you for doing the same with the anchoring mishap. You remind me that I must replace the 109 traveler lines with Nylon. Now on the list for this winter, thanks.
I would add to no clutter , avoid narrow side decks.
Our current Bluewater 420 advertises “wide side decks’,- 50% narrower than our previous Alan Payne Skookum. That boat , which avoids almost all things on your list, had no tendency to round up in 20000 nm of sailing.
Hi Bruce,
I agree, wide side decks add a lot of forgiveness: just easier and safer to get around, and also make it a lot easier to build a low drag risk jackline system too. The wide sidedecks of our J/109 is one of the things that sealed the deal for us, and the M&R 56 had wide side decks too.
My boat does pretty well on the forgiveness scale based on your factors but I’m wondering about dinghy davits. Some proclaim them to be dangerous should the boat broach and the dinghy drags in the water. I’ve never had that experience in my coastal cruising, and for ocean passages down the US coast I remove the outboard to reduce weight and dragging potential. The dinghy can be hoisted high enough to make it pretty hard to drag. If I were doing a more significant passage, say to Bermuda, I’d put the dinghy on the deck, perhaps deflated to create more walk-around room since the boat is narrow for a 43 footer. Any thoughts on davits?
Hi Jesse,
Personally I’m not a fan of davits and we always struck our dinghy below before going to sea (the reason we never had a RIB) but this is far from a black and white issue. I guess the key test is will whatever you do really stand up to a full on storm at sea? I see very few, probably no, davit set ups that would pass that test for me. I don’t love dinghies on deck either, but I think it can be done well as long as the lashing points are strong enough. Most I see are not. Also, I’m horrified when I see a huge RIB taking up the whole foredeck of a smaller boat, so the crew can barely, if at all, get to the bow safely.
More thoughts here: https://www.morganscloud.com/2011/02/25/clear-the-decks-for-action/
Hi Jesse,
I have grappled with the same question. My conclusion is that at some point, the waves get big enough and start breaking to where a dinghy in davits is a real liability which could badly injure someone or make the cockpit unusable (steering, etc.). At what wave height this occurs is boat and davits dependent. This is a problem that needs to be solved before leaving port where a dinghy can still be moved safely.
For coastal cruising in normal mid latitude areas with good forecasts, I think you can reliably keep the waves under these levels for a boat of the size you have. There are some people who will go out in conditions that are bad enough to push it past my safety threshold coastally but those people are a minority. However, I am definitely sure that I would not be okay with it where you might encounter bad weather or waves against current offshore so for something like a Bermuda trip, I would refuse to have a dinghy in davits. I have seen waves hit boats in davits of large traditional vessels that were normally ridiculously high out of the water and cause quite a bit of damage.
To me, a reasonable compromise then becomes using davits coastally and then stowing below before going offshore. Assuming the davits are just bare davits and well mounted, they probably are not a huge risk offshore unless you are planning to go to extreme places but most are not hard to remove either and that would be better. But for this to work, you have to actually be diligent about this and you have to watch the weather and not push things going coastal.
I also think that there are some significant safety benefits of davits when used coastally compared to other options if you actually use them all the time. At 2am when a thunderstorm rolls in, you are not trying to deal with your dinghy or avoid wrapping the prop with the painter. You also never have to unfoul the painter from fishing gear or try to deal with a swamped dinghy in a bumpy sea. And unlike storing below, you always have a dinghy ready to run out a kedge, go grab an MOB, etc. It just proves that none of the solutions are perfect.
In our own case, we made the conscious decision for this boat to be a coastal cruiser. We really like hard dinghies, I refuse to tow a dinghy, I wouldn’t want to inflate/deflate an inflatable once or twice a day, and our boat is small enough that any dinghy that fits on deck would not hold the whole family. Taken together, the solution for coastal sailing for us is davits. They are super convenient but I also hate the windage and the weight back there plus it spoils some of the view. We do also have a wood floor inflatable with a 2hp outboard that we can and have switched to allowing stowage below if going somewhere we wouldn’t feel comfortable with the hard dinghy in davits. But we don’t think anything of having the dinghy in davits for something like a quick coastal overnight sail, we are likely to bail on it for comfort reasons before the dinghy becomes a liability. At this point, we have never had a wave get close to hitting our dinghy on this boat although as referenced above, I have seen dinghies in davits get pretty beat up.
This topic has actually been on my mind a lot recently as I really want a lighter dinghy. One of the questions is whether it needs to be nesting to allow for stowage on deck but that constrains some design elements and makes it harder to build and gets you to deck storage which I still don’t love. I am guessing that I will just build something similar to our current dinghy but using cored construction rather than the solid laminate of the production dinghy and it will be great for anything Bahamas to Nova Scotia.
Eric
speaking of nesting dinghies:
Hi Eric,
I have a nesting dinghy (a Chameleon, a Danny Greene design) which lives just in front of the dodger under the boom (on Alchemy, a 40 foot Valiant 42) where it is less likely to get hammered by a wave, but is also well secured with thru-bolted/ backing-plated Wichard folding-down padeyes and backing plates. It has lived there, completely out of the way, for ~~13 years surviving one higher latitude North Atlantic crossing and some moderate storms while coastal cruising.
The builder reported it is just under 100 pounds, 50 pounds per hull, and is 10 feet 4 inches long. A flush deck forward gives ample storage through a hatch and, with the stern benches, provides ample flotation. We did not want the sailing rig and sealed up the centerboard trunk, but reports are she is fun to sail, especially good for children around an anchorage. Many are hand built by owners. Ours was professionally built in England where we found her.
Benefits:
I like very much to row and she rows very well, particularly after I got me 7-foot light-weight oars from Shaw and Tenney. Moving around an anchorage in a hard dinghy is just far more pleasant that it was when I had an inflatable, especially an inflatable with a gas outboard.
She is very slippery on the water and works well with our Torqeedo electric motor where we have found excellent range at moderate speed. At full speed we are going very fast. And I love not having gas/petrol aboard.
It is re-assuring, when using the engine, to know that I have good back-up propulsion were the engine to run out of power/fuel or I hit a rock with the engine or something. It occasionally worried me when we had an inflatable that getting it to wind (with a dead engine on the stern) in anything much more that 12kn TW and a bit of chop was very difficult. In remote areas this was a safety concern.
We do tow, at times, when coastal cruising and she tows easily and tracks well. She has 2 towing rings: one high and one waterline and we always use 2 painters (going opposite sides to stern cleats) which allows for adjustment of towing position.
Caveats:
I think I could figure out how to put it together and launch single-handed, but I am glad I have never had to do so. There are reports that she can be put together in the water (put the hulls in separately), but not sure how that would be done.
Its size is what it is: we have taken 2 adults and 2 grandchildren (under 10 yo) quite easily, 3 adults fine, 4 would be pushing it, perhaps ok in perfect conditions.
There is nothing about launching that is hard, but it does take is ~~20 minutes or so now that we have our system. Using a spare halyard, we assemble upright just forward of the mast and lift from the dinghy’s bow over the lifelines and into the water with me guiding and Ginger on the winch with an EWincher.
Nesting dinghies are not inexpensive: basically 2 boats (hulls) need to be built. But, with care, you need never purchase another dinghy: cannot say that with an inflatable.
Hard dinghies are easily fixed from the bumps and scrapes and dings of everyday usage with supplies most boats carry and likely less prone to a catastrophic injury (a sliced inflatable tube for example).
Write up of a home build (possibly, I could contact if interested): https://wendyhinman.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Building-a-Nesting-Dinghy-Voyages-Mag-2014.pdf
My best, Dick Stevenson, s/v Alchemy
Hi Dick,
Thanks for the thoughts on the nesting dinghy. From time to time I think we should consider a PT11 which gets rave reviews for practicality and fun but it doesn’t meet a few of our requirements. We really want to keep the length to 10′ to keep it well inside our beam and minimize windage but then we also want to hold 650lbs and be able to trim the boat with 1-4 people aboard necessitating 3 rowing positions (my wife and I split the rowing but with an 80lb weight differential, we have found this requires at least 2 positions and then a third is required for being alone or with 3 or 4 people). Our current Trinka 10 does this pretty well although it gives up a bit of performance when more lightly loaded and is heavy at nearly 150lbs. Another interesting boat is the 10’2″ Acorn Dinghy from Iain Oughtred which is like an old style ship’s boat so great load carrying for decent rowing ability, the Fatty Knees dinghies are sort of similar to this. My grandfather built the 11’9″ version of the Acorn which has much finer lines and it was my all-time favorite dinghy but too big for our boat.
I am generally not a fan of future proofing as you spend a lot of effort and make compromises for a future you invariably predict incorrectly. For that reason, I am not likely to build a nesting dinghy as the known future doesn’t require it even though I would love to have the option to occasionally stow on the cabintop. If I were thinking of a PT Spear or a PT11, I would probably build the nesting version but otherwise, I think I should just build what I know will work.
The way we use a dinghy, we often launch and use it in the morning, haul it, sail somewhere else, then use it again and haul it before going to bed so lots of in and out. Our current setup means that whoever is dealing with the dinghy spends <15 minutes a day on it and I really want to not add time so unfortunately davits are the answer for me despite the windage and weight placement issues. It just means we really focus on these 2 items in other areas.
I have played around with this and have a rough design in CAD similar to the boats mentioned above which I am confident can be built in the <80lb range but still have good durability. To John’s point of forgiveness, I could build it for 50lbs but then 1 unseen sharp rock, a bump from another dinghy at the dinghy dock or stepping in the wrong place could cause real problems. It is too bad there is not a production dinghy like this that I know of, they are all pretty heavy due to solid layup.
Eric
Thanks for your thoughts Eric. My conclusions are basically the same as yours – davits are fine for coastal cruising provided you watch the weather. My davits are attached to a very solid stainless rear arch and work off a purchase that cantilevers the davit from it. The dinghy can be hoisted quite high off the water and tucked tight to the arch with this system. I’m definitely interested the nesting dinghy option for on-deck storage but that’s much further down the road when I have the time to build one.
Hi. First time poster, but I’ve been reading your blog for a while now. In the photo, above, that shows the boom gallows, it looks as if the mainsheet will place a lateral load on the gallows, even with the traveler fully eased. If true, isn’t that likely to place excessive loads on the gallows and it’s mounts on deck?
Hi Christopher,
Sharp eyes, you are correct. That said, the gallows and mounts are massive and the pipe well rounded so it never caused a problem or even signs of chafe.. Also, it only happens when the sail is all the way out, so low load, and only one leg of the tackle so a quarter of that load, and minimal deflection.
Add it all up and I would guess the total load on the gallows at less than 20 lb, so a well worth while trade off to get the safety and forgiveness of a gallows.
Hi John,
In mast roller furling also negatively impacts a sailboat righting moment. I struggle just looking at them.
We recently got rid of our BBQ grill, a nice big Magnum. The place it took and the placement was really a downside that did not make up for the upsides it did bring us. It was that extra thing to look out for while walking on deck there, aft, aside from the backstay. Should we have to do complex foot placement because we like BBQ? No. And we don’t need it. That being said, we don’t have gas inside, which I was adamant on for health reason (the evidence is there) and safety reasons. We will purchase a foldable camping stove in New Zealand for redundancy and try not to forget where we’ve put it. That way we will not be entirely reliant on electricity for cooking food, should the electrical fail us.
This article comes on point for a friend I’m trying to help purchase a boat. His budget is significant, hence his top 3 is Hallberg Rassy 50, Oyster 49.5 and Amel 50. To be clear, those are not bad options, but still, I cringe.
With his budget and the high latitude sailing he wants to do, I’m like, no twin rudder please, no keel bulb or fin keel, no spade rudder either! We were involved in a rescue for a broken spade rudder coming from NZ to Fiji in May and it sure strikes ones imagination, although I did not need that case example to know spade rudder are less sturdy… It just broke in 5-6 m rough seas… We were 1st responder from 4 am to sundown and barely had to alter course to reach them, although they were some 100 nm away. The Fijian coast guard were not coming because the weather was too bad… At sundown, the Australian Navy ended up getting the okay to evacuate the crew and tow that boat. I’ve never been that grateful not to have to try to rescue the crew in those seas. We had a plan and it thankfully remained just that. Luckily for us, our boat was taking it like a light beer on a hot summer day.
Anyhow, I want my friend to have that. He should go center cockpit, step keel mast, semifull keel, integrated in the hull if possible, skeg hug rudder… I want him to pick a boat that will take care of him and crew in the nasty stuff, not one he needs to worry about and babysit when it gets bad. He has the incredible privilege of having the budget for all that. I also honestly think he should cross a rough ocean before purchasing.
There is a 2019 Kraken 50 in Australia he should get. That zero keel? Reinforced skeg hug rudder? Come on!?
Anyhow, I’ll steer him towards AAC, once more!
Hi Marie Eve,
I agree with most of that, except any intrinsic superiority of full keels or skeg rudders:
https://www.morganscloud.com/2019/10/20/buying-a-boat-never-say-never/
https://www.morganscloud.com/2020/03/08/planning-and-budgeting-a-refit-rudders-part-1-the-problem-defined/
That said, I agree that if he wants to sail the high latitudes the boats he is considering are not the right ones.