This post is dedicated to my friend, Margee, who was stuck at work on the day we were sailing. I promised her this post and wrote it so she could sail vicariously through me. I’d like all my readers to wish her congratulations as she recently graduated from veterinary school and is now a Doggy Doc.

Well, Friday, I went down to s/v Felix to see if I could help with a few of the issues we discovered on the delivery trip. When John got to the boat, we took her out for a short sail. As you can see from this photo, it really wasn’t looking to be great weather for a sail.

The view aft as we were leaving the marina.

On our way out of the harbor, we saw three Optimist dinghies training. This reminded me of my friend Alex’s son, Fred, who competes in the Optimist class back in Portugal

Optimist Sailing Dinghies with a chase boat.

The afternoon sail started out with fairly heavy fog…. oddly, there was still wind, which is fairly unusual for foggy conditions.

Sailing into a foggy afternoon on Buzzards Bay.

This did not bode well for the afternoon’s sail or what conditions would be like out on Buzzards Bay. However, conditions and sailing turned out to be much better than one would expect. The sun tried to break through the heavily overcast skies and fog several times.

Detail of sky, as sun tries to break through overcast skies.

The pale sun tries to make an appearance.

However, all afternoon, the sun kept trying to make an appearance, and at one point we were sailing with sun above and only about a 1/4 mile of visibility all-around due to heavy fog down low.

We were not alone. Off and on during the day we would spot a ghostly sailboat companion.

Another sailboat was a ghostly and silent companion.

I was curious as to how a smaller monohull sailboat, with only a mainsail up and towing a dinghy was able to keep fair pace with us. Well, as we got closer, it was pretty clear, they were motorsailing.

They were motorsailing.

The fog got heavier and lighter as the sun and clouds battled it out during the day. At times the clouds and fog were winning, as you can see here.

The fog overpowers the sun...

The heavy fog reminded me of a Stephen King novella called The Mist. It was one I gave my twin brother just before he went on a ski trip to Maine, and the heavy fog they had during the trip had him pretty freaked out. Psychological mind-games on your family and friends can be so much fun.

The fog deepens

The strangest part was that during even the heaviest fog, we still had a decent amount of wind, varying from about 5 knots up to about 12.

Returning to Marion, we decided to see whether we could pick up the mooring under sail. On the sail back to the mooring, the sun finally won the battle for the day.

Sailing into Sippican Harbor

Clearing blue skies and light winds were our companions as we ghosted along at two knots.

Clearing blue skies as the sun wins out.

John at the helm under light conditions as we ghost along Marion harbor.

We failed at picking up the mooring under sail. It was my first attempt to pickup the mooring on a Gemini catamaran, much less under sail… but we did get pretty close. Oh, well… I’ll do better next time.  One of the more interesting boats in Marion Harbor is this Newick influenced home built boat.  The boat’s owner’s brother designed the boat and worked for Dick Newick prior to designing the boat.

An interesting home-built Newick-influenced Trimaran

I headed off to have dinner with my extended family, which is a Friday ritual. Unfortunately,when I called to let them know I was headed up, I found that my aunt had to cancel, so I called John and headed back to the marina to have dinner with John.  When I was heading back out the s/v Felix with the launch to meet John, the sun had clearly won out over the fog and overcast skies of earlier in the day.

The sun clearly won out at the end of the day.

We went to Margaret’s, in Fairhaven, which is a regular stop for the crew of my boat and led to one of the big surprises of the evening.

As we walked in the restaurant, a man sitting at a table near the door asked who I was. When I asked him why he wanted to know, he asked if I owned a Gemini Telstar. I replied, “Yes, I have a Telstar 28, and it is made by the company that makes the Gemini catamaran.” He said, “I’m Walt.”

I knew immediately knew who he was now. He and his wife Carolyn own a Gemini 105 Mc catamaran, and we’d been in e-mail contact off an on for several years. He had sent me some photos of my boat under sail, but we had never met in person. Walt was one of the Gemini owners that I had been wanting to introduce John to, since Walt keeps his boat a short way down the harbor from mine, and has owned her for quite some time and has done some excellent video of his boat under sail.

After dinner, and speaking with Walt and Carolyn a bit more, we headed over to the Brady Ice Box for dessert. They had just closed for the evening, but opened to let us buy some ice cream. One of the young ladies working there is one I remembered from previous visits. Here she is , on the left, with one of her co-workers from a trip to the Brady Ice Box three years ago.

The crew at the Brady Ice Box, summer 2006

It really seems to me that the signs that John and s/v Felix were meant for each other are all showing up this summer.

Well, this past weekend, had me working on three different boats on three different days. Three days and three different boats—Saturday: an O’Day Javelin; Sunday: an O’Day 302; Monday: a Gemini 105Mc Catamaran.

It started out on Saturday, when I was helping my friend’s son and a friend with the O’Day Javelin that they bought a couple years ago.

One interesting thing that we found on the Javelin was the smallest whisker pole I’ve ever seen. It is about an inch in diameter and about four-and-a-half feet long. Of course, it is for a 14′ boat, so that’s pretty much the right size.

O’Day Javelin Whisker Pole

Saturday afternoon, I drove down to Connecticut, to visit Denby. After meeting Denby and his wife at their house, Denby and I headed down to the boat, which is kept in Milford Harbor. Here is Denby’s boat, tied up to one of the docks near the parking lot.

Denby’s O’Day 302, s/v Slight Breeze

At first, I wasn’t sure why Denby named the boat as he did, but after seeing what the conditions on Long Island Sound are like… that’s probably all he ever sails in…

Denby’s O’Day 302, s/v Slight Breeze

His boat has a CRT-based Furuno Radar that is almost as old as me… and the radar mount is, at least according to his friend, the original prototype for a gimballed radar mount. PYI has come a long way from this, if you’ve seen Gui’s radar mount.

An old gimballed radar mount

Here’s Denby prepping dinner.

Denby cooking dinner

Not a bad cook, but his boat lost points for not having fitted sheets in the v-berth. He did gain a point back for the sailing motif on the comforter.

The v-berth on s/v Slight Breeze

Here’s s/v Slight Breeze motoring out to where we anchored overnight, behind Charles Island.

s/v Slight Breeze on the way to Charles Island

On Sunday morning, we went sailing. The weather goddess was kind enough to give us about six knots of wind… here you can see Denby resting… old guys like him need lots of sleep.

Denby asleep in the cockpit

Denby decided to take over the helm, and the wind immediately died. The weather goddess did not approve of his helm technique, seen here.

Denby asleep at the helm

We got back into Milford Harbor and walked over to the car. On the way to the car, we saw this little submarine.

A small submarine in Milford Harbor

After a quick trip to West Marine, to pickup some supplies, we headed back to the boat, and Denby went up the mast. He was using a pair of ascenders, a bosun’s chair, a spliced foot strap and I was using the new main halyard as a safety line.

Denby up the mast

Well, a few bugs need to be worked out so that his self-ascending system will work. As it is, the ascenders dig too deeply into the line for him to be able to release them without me taking up his weight on the main halyard. If he had gone up by himself, he’d probably still be there.

After getting Denby back down, we headed to the house for dinner. After fixing Denby’s WiFi network and his computer, so that he doesn’t have to steal his wife’s laptop.

The next morning I headed off to Defender, to pickup a few things. While I was there, I called my friend John, owner of s/v Felix and asked if he needed anything. He asked me to pickup some SOLAS flares and a shore power cable for him, and asked if I wanted to drop the stuff off at his boat in Marion. Since I could go sailing if I did that, I did.

I drove to Marion and met with John, Lorie and Chris and off we went. Here’s John looking aft on s/v Felix.

Looking aft on s/v Felix

On our way out of Marion, we had about 10 knots of wind. After being out for a while the wind got very light and fluky, and then stopped almost completely, so we fired up the iron genny, so we could back in time to make the last launch.

Heading north to Marion in s/v Felix

Lorie took the helm and as we got closer to Marion, the wind picked up to 17-18 knots, and we dropped the engine into neutral and unfurled the genoa and sailed back into Marion. Here’s Lorie at the helm and a photo of the run into Marion.

Lorie at the helm, on the way to Marion

Looking south as we head back to Marion

After we got back into Marion, we went to dinner at the Mattapoisett Chowder House. As we were going into the restaurant, I got a call from Denby… he was wondering why I hadn’t been online yet… and my excuse was a good one—”Sorry, I was out sailing in 18 knots of wind…” For some reason Denby started swearing…

The s/v Pretty Gee, under sail, on the long way to her mooring.

Yesterday, Johnnie Jr. and I went down to the marina to setup the mooring I’m using for the Pretty Gee this season. We got out the inflatable dinghy and rowed out to the mooring and attached the mooring pennant. I’m using a fairly heavy mooring pennant, 3/4″ x 15′. It’s attached to the boat via the port side bow chock and then looped over the foredeck cleats. I think this should work quite well. The pennant is too thick to come out of the bow chocks by itself, so I haven’t lashed it down.

After rowing back to the slip and tying the dinghy to the big boat, we had to move the big boat to the mooring. So, we warmed up the iron genny and headed out for the swing bridge. As we were motoring out to the swing bridge, I showed Johnnie the easy way to stow an inflatable dinghy—I hauled it up on to the ama deck—fully inflated and tied the bridle to a padeye on the deck. Beats towing it, trying to horse it up onto the foredeck, or deflating it and stowing it.

Johnnie Jr. looking off at the Elizabeth Islands.

After passing the swing bridge, we raised the main and unfurled the genoa. It was time to go sailing. We woke up Otto from his winter hibernation and set off for a day just sailing on Buzzards Bay.

Otto at the helm, leaving nothing but a wake while under sail.

We didn’t have any plans or destination, just wanted to be out sailing on such a beautiful day. We sailed around the bay for about five hours and decided it was time to head back and try out the mooring. As we motored up to the swing bridge, we passed two catamarans in the mooring field just south of Pope’s Island. Neither is a particularly sleek looking boat, but the one on the right looks like it sails like a dog—it definitely falls into the floating condo variant of catamaran, rather than the ones designed to sail well.

Two catamarans in the mooring field south of Pope’s Island.

We had tried the mooring pennant out on the boat before going out to attach it to the mooring, so I wasn’t too worried about how it would fit. It looks like she’ll lie to the mooring without the need for a bridle. Somehow, it took us over seven hours to get the boat on a mooring that is only five hundred feet from the dock the boat was in.

The s/v Pretty Gee finally on her mooring.

Note: I’ve been tweaking the lazy jacks, the mainsail furling system and the reefing systems on the boat. I added blocks to the reefing cringles on the mainsail and have run the reefing lines up to the blocks and then back down to the mast base and then aft to the cockpit. I’ve also added stopper knots in the reefing lines, so we know how much line needs to be let out to hoist the main fully. It looks like the halyards led aft project is really going to pay off this season. This sail was to shake down the modifications I’ve made to the systems over the winter.

This past Christmas, I received a SPOT Messenger. I didn’t activate it until just recently, when I was helping deliver a sailboat from Annapolis to Marion, Mass. The reason I decided to activate the SPOT service was so that several of the families and friends of two of my fellow delivery crew would be able to keep an eye on them, since this would be their first major passage.

The SPOT Messenger is a small GPS-based satellite transponder that uses the GlobalStar satellite network to transmit location and time data as well as one of four types of messages. The four message types are:

1. I’m OK
2. Help
3. 911—send help
4. Tracking update

The first three message types are included in the basic $99 annual service.

The “I’m OK” message is basically just that… to let people know where you are and that you’re okay.

The “Help” message can be tailored via the SPOT Messenger website to be a “call me” or “send money” or some other type of message, that requires some action on the part of the persons monitoring you.

The “911″ message will result in the SPOT Message service center calling the authorities to respond… and should only be used in a true emergency.

Please note: While some people think that the “911″ feature will replace an EPIRB, I disagree. First, the SPOT Messenger relies on the Globalstar satellite network, which has some serious issues. Second, an EPIRB or PLB acts as a SAR Transponder and broadcasts a 121.5 MHz signal to help SAR personnel locate you. Third, the run time on the EPIRB or PLB and durability of the units is probably much greater.

SPOT Messenger Coverage.

The fourth type of message is a tracking message, and it requires the real-time tracking service, which costs an additional $49 per year. To send these messages, you put the SPOT into tracking mode. These can then be seen on a SPOT tracking page.

There are a couple issues IMHO with the SPOT and its tracking mode. First, tracking mode is only active for 24 hours, and then it needs to be re-activated. Second, tracking mode sends a message out every ten minutes, which is a bit too short a time interval for most sailboat tracks.

Personally, I think that tracking mode should stay active until it is deactivated. I also think that there should be some other intervals for tracking messages, say 10 minutes, 1 hour, and 6 hours or something similar. This would make tracking boats much simpler, since the SPOT would operate for about a month if it was allowed to send messages every hour instead of every 10 minutes.

BTW, if anyone is interested, here’s a patched together image of the SPOTcasting route from the s/v Felix delivery. Not quite a complete log of the journey as I didn’t have the SPOT in tracking mode for the very first part of the trip.

Click image for a larger version.

Last Wednesday, I took the Acela train down to BWI. I went down to help my friends deliver s/v Felix, a Gemini 105Mc Catamaran from Annapolis, MD, to her new home port of Marion, MA. I stayed with my friends Mary and Chuck, who also own a Gemini catamaran. Mary would be joining the delivery crew for the trip up to Marion.

My friend John had bought her last week from her owner in North Carolina, and brought her from North Carolina to Norfolk, VA, with the help of her former owner. John, his wife Lorie, and their son Chris, along with Bill, a delivery captain and fellow Gemini owner brought the boat up to the Performance Cruising factory’s docks on Back Creek, in Annapolis.

John and Mary on the way from Back Creek to the Little Magothy River.

Thursday, John and I went out to get provisions for the boat. While Frank had left the boat fairly well provisioned, it didn’t have all of what we needed aboard. Thursday afternoon, John, Mary and I moved s/v Felix from the PCI factory dock to Mike and Amy’s dock on the Little Magothy River. This turned out to be a wise move, as the Severn River, where Back Creek is, was later shut down due to President Obama speaking at the Naval Academy graduation. If we had stayed at the PCI docks, there would have been a good chance we would have been trapped by the closure of the Severn River and lost our chance to leave with the tide.

Passing under the William P. Lane Jr. Memorial Bridges.

Friday—May 22

Friday morning, I went to BWI to pickup the delivery captain for the Annapolis to Marion leg of the delivery. By strange happenstance, the delivery captain John had hired for this final leg of the trip was a friend of mine, Norm. I hadn’t sailed with Norm in a few years, and I was looking forward to sailing with him again. As a bonus for Mary and John, Norm is one of the better sailing instructors I know, and I knew they would both learn a lot on this trip from the two of us.

After a quick run to the store for some final supplies, we cast off the docklines and headed north, up the Chesapeake. We had planned on leaving a bit before noon, hoping to catch the flood tide and have it help push us north to the C&D canal. It had been quite some time since any of us had done this particular trip—as I haven’t done a C&D canal passage in over 15 years, and for Norm it had been almost 10 years.

Leaving Chuck, s/v Patience Too and the Little Magothy River.

Motorsailing north to the C&C Canal.

Friday, we motorsailed for much of the day. The winds were fairly light from the south for much of it… so they did help a bit. We made the canal entrance about 1800 on Friday night. This made the approach easy, but would require us to transit part of the canal near dusk. Fortunately, s/v Felix was equipped with a Raymarine C80 and radar, which made keeping an eye out for other marine traffic much easier. The Chesapeake and Delaware Canal is fairly serpentine, and I didn’t remember it being so curved.

A buoy on the C&D Canal shows the strong following current.

Norm shows off his grilling skills while underway.

Friday night sunset on the C&D Canal.

Saturday—May 23

Once we got out of the canal and onto the Delaware River, keeping an eye out for barges and other large commercial traffic became even more important. Our goal was to make the Cape May canal entrance a bit before dawn. We were planning on waiting until after sunrise to actually enter the Cape May canal. The Cape May canal is fairly pretty. However, the bridges seem a bit worn and most of the traffic appears to be powerboats, rather than commercial shipping or sailboats

Saturday morning sunrise over Cape May, New Jersey.

Another view of the sunrise over the Cape May Canal.

An old railroad swing bridge on the Cape May Canal.

We made the mistake of stopping at Utsch’s Marina for fuel. Our plan was to get breakfast ashore there, fuel up, pump out the holding tank, and take showers… that wasn’t quite how it turned out. The marina staff there was surly and rude, and the marina doesn’t offer much in the way of services for people not actually staying in the marina. Boats visiting the fuel docks are only given access to a pair of rather disgusting Porta-Johns, rather than the actual restrooms. We decided to just get fuel, water and ice, and get out of there as quickly as possible. I would highly recommend not stopping their if you should be going through the Cape May canal.

Utsch’s Marina, which offers very little to the transient cruising boat.

Once outside Cape May, we had a decision to make. Originally, our plan was to go up along the New Jersey coastline, past Sandy Point, into New York City Harbor and go up the Hudson to the East River through the Hell Gate and out into Long Island Sound. Our other choice was to shoot straight for Block Island. Given the fact that it was Memorial Day weekend, and that it was also Fleet Week there, and there would probably be some restrictions on the movement of small craft through the harbor, we decided to go the offshore route.

Mary at the helm, on the bluewater leg from Cape May to Block Island.

Once we were headed offshore, we decided to kill the engine and unfurl the screacher. We were able to make about the same speed under sail as we had been doing under power, but with far less noise. There is a lot to be said for being able to sail, especially when on a delivery, and trying to make as much progress as possible.

Sailing with the main and screacher on s/v Felix, between Cape May and Block Island.

At night, we usually tuck in a reef in the mainsail. Tucking in a reef is generally a prudent measure, since trying to reef at night if the wind builds is generally more difficult than doing so before the sun goes down. As the wind died, we fired up the iron genny to keep our speed up a bit. Fuel was a consideration, since we were trying to avoid having to stop to re-fuel again before making Marion. The only real possible fuel stop would have been Block Island, and Block Island on Memorial Day weekend was also something to be avoided.

Norm rests up for his next watch.

John and I were on watch and the wind picked up a bit… so we unfurled the screacher once again, to try and conserve as much fuel as possible. John and I preferred to sail as much as possible.

Sunday—May 24

The winds on Sunday were rather light and fluky. We motorsailed for most of the day. As the day wore on, the fog would thicken and fall off… having the radar on was reassuring. We used the sails as much as possible, but the fog and light winds were not ideal. As we approached the eastern end of Long Island, heavy thunderstorms were reported in Long Island Sound, with hail, and possibly waterspouts. We were happy to be well off-shore with the bad weather fairly far to our northwest. However, the storms were headed southeast, so we might not get away completely free and Norm put a reef in the main and we made sure to have at least two wraps of the sheets on the roller furled genoa and screacher sails.

As we came abeam of Block Island, an interesting thing happened. I noticed heavy rain on the radar. Zooming out on the display, I saw that we had what appeared to be fairly heavy rains in all directions, but curiously, we were in the center of a relatively rain free bubble in the center of the radar screen. Seeing the heavy rain approaching on the radar, I battened down the hatches, closing off the cockpit door and pinning the port in it shut.

The cockpit of the Gemini is fairly well sheltered, and we had the starboard and aft portions of the cockpit enclosure that attaches to the hard top bimini and cockpit coamings up. Unfortunately, the storm appeared to be coming from the Northwest, which put it on our aft port quarter, where the enclosure was wide open.

The rain storms dissipating around on as seen on the radar.

We waited… and waited… and the rain free zone moved eastward with us… I could see the rain off in the distance, but the heavy rain never reached us. Apparently, the weather goddess was hard at work. Norm went off watch and John came on. One interesting thing that John hadn’t seen was how some buoys are also RAdio BeaCONs, or RACONs. The Narraganset-Buzzards Bay Approach buoy is one of these. It emits a Morse A on radar frequencies. The Buzzards Bay Entrance Light is another RACON.

An hour later it was time for me to go off watch. I woke Mary and went over the route and course for entering Buzzards Bay with both of them and headed off to sleep. When I woke the next morning, John and Norm were going over the approach to the northern end of Buzzards Bay. The sun wasn’t quite up yet, and we were headed up to where the route to Marion splits from that to the Cape Cod Canal, just south of Cleveland Ledge.

Monday—May 25

Sunrise over Buzzards Bay, on Memorial Day 2009.

As the sun rose, Norm and John turned north to head into Sippican Harbor. Norm pointed out that the Cleveland Ledge and Bird Island Lights form a range that marks the eastern boundary of the approach into Marion. The fuel dock for Burr Brothers is almost as far back in the harbor as you can go. I think s/v Felix will find her mooring quite sheltered.

Norm ties a spring line to s/v Felix at the Burr Brothers fuel dock.

While we were tied up to the fuel dock, we rinsed the boat down, fueled up and took showers. Elizabeth, Norm’s wife, was going to meet us for breakfast just a short walk down the street. After breakfast, we all returned to the boat and took her out to her new mooring. Burr Brothers runs a good launch service, but also has dinghy facilities for those preferring to use their own dinghy.

Getting a Crew Together

In the case of this particular delivery, John was fairly lucky. As Norm recently told me, getting sufficient crew together for a delivery is often difficult. Originally, the delivery crew for the Annapolis-to-Marion leg would have been John and Norm. The fact that John and I recently became friends helped, especially since I already knew Norm. For me, it was a bonus, since I was sailing with three of my friends. Norm is a very experienced sailor, and I am fairly experienced. John and Mary are less experienced, and having the mix of experience allowed us to usually have one of the more experienced sailors on each watch for some time.

Serendipity gave us a fourth crew member, as I asked Mary and Chuck if I could stay with them prior to leaving for the delivery trip. She was available and looking to get some experience, including night sailing, and asked if there was room for her aboard the boat. The fact that she also owns a Gemini was a bonus for John and her both. For John, it provided a resource on some boat specific issues that can crop up—like the sonic saildrive leg not retracting. For Mary, it gave her a wide range of experience on what is essentially her boat….while leaving s/v Patience Too for her husband to go sailing on.

John on the foredeck of s/v Felix on the approach to Sippican Harbor.

Night Watches

The watch system we used on the trip wasn’t a very rigorous one, but in general, the active watch consisted of two people on slightly staggered shifts, so that there was some continuity between watch rotations. This makes a lot of sense, if you have the people to do it, since it reduces the chances that something will drop through the cracks, like the tug and barge that one watch was keeping an eye on won’t be as easily forgotten about.

If you were on watch and had to leave the cockpit at night, a tether and harness was required. Doing a MOB recovery at night is really not much fun, and you really need to avoid it as much as possible. We had rigged jacklines both port and starboard. My recommendation for permanently rigged jacklines is to use 1/4″ or 5/16″ Spectra or Dyneema line with polyester tubular webbing over it. This gives you a very strong, low-stretch, jackline that is readily identifiable in the dark and won’t roll underfoot.

Reefing the main sail at sunset is generally a good idea, as I mentioned previously. While you might lose some speed, it is usually a good compromise between safety and speed to do so. Shaking a reef out in the morning is not all that difficult to do, and not having to go forward to reef if the wind picks up after dark is something most will appreciate.

Provisioning

First, prior to any passage, it is a really wise idea to get a list of any allergies your crew will have. In the case of this trip, one of our crew had a gluten allergy. Fortunately, Mike and Amy’s dock is about five minutes from a gluten-free specialty grocer, so provisioning the boat for this trip was relatively easy.

Also, checking the boat’s inventory of equipment would be wise. Given how thoroughly equipped Frank, s/v Felix’s former owner, had left the boat, we skipped this, and I was deprived of the pancakes that Mary had promised to make, since we did not have anything remotely resembling a spatula in the galley. Obviously, this is more an issue on a new boat or a delivery than it would be on your own boat.

Sanitation Systems

Because of the way the holding tank is setup on the Geminis, we were able to easily dump the holding tank while out past the three-mile limit. This is something I would highly recommend every boat be capable of doing, since as Utsch’s Marina proved, pumpout facilities aren’t always available where you expect them to be.

Shaking Down s/v Felix

Overall, s/v Felix performed like a champ. John got a pretty good idea of how his new boat handles and performs over a fairly wide range of conditions. We only had a couple small problems that John will need to deal with during the delivery run.

One issue was an electrical one that cropped up with the stern light. Fortunately, we were able to work around it, since s/v Felix is small enough that an all-around white light can substitute for the stern and steaming lights, and a tri-color can be used in place of the stern and bi-color lights.

The other issue was small leaks at some of the ports. My guess is that the dogs on those ports need to be adjusted, rather than it being anything more serious. Still, it was an issue that needs to be addressed shortly.

Tides and Currents

Planning the trip to take full advantage of the tide and currents was important. On most sailboats, which can only go 6-7 knots under power, having the current with you can give you a significant boost in speed, reduce the voyage duration and conserve considerable fuel. We were fairly fortunate on this delivery to have the tides and currents working for us almost the entire trip.

Norm checks the tide and currents one last time as we head north to the C&D Canal.

Weather Windows

It is important to keep a good eye on your weather window, whether you’re cruising or doing a delivery. The south side of Long Island and the New Jersey coast are both relatively poor areas, since neither has much in the way of accessible heavy weather harbors. If the weather forecast had be less favorable, we might have had to wait it out. However, with cell phones and NOAA VHF broadcasts, it was pretty easy to get a fairly decent idea of what our weather window for the next 24-48 hours would be.

As it turned out, we actually had far better weather by going offshore, since Long Island Sound got pretty badly hammered, and the water was cold enough to dissipate the storms before they could get out as far as us. Cold waters tend to depower and weaken most smaller storms.

On a sailing forum, the question of what tools should a boat have aboard came up. While the tool kit would vary, depending on what boat you have and what area you’re sailing in, as well as what kind of sailing you’ll be doing. If you’re just day-sailing or weekending, or sail on a landlocked lake, the tool kit below is probably overkill, and too much to carry on a regular basis.

However, if you’re sailing on the ocean, or on longer journeys, it would probably make sense to carry this kit, to minimize the number of problems that require external assistance. I believe the more self-sufficient a sailor is, the lower his cruising costs will be, and the safer passages will be. A fairly complete cruising sailor’s tool kit would include the following:

Mechanics Tools:

These are the tools generally needed to repair the mechanical systems, like the engine, and are used in repairing and maintaining most other systems on a boat.

• A Craftsman mechanics set—this includes both metric and imperial, since I’ve found on my boat there is a mix… the outboards use metric, the rest of the boat is pretty much imperial
• Several assorted visegrips
• Assorted screwdrivers, including torx, allen, flat and phillips blades
• A large set of channel locks
• A pipe wrench
• A hacksaw—with extra blades
• Some chisels—for both wood and metal
• A few drift punches
• An automatic centerpunch
• A small sledge
• A ball peen hammer
• A claw hammer
• Assorted files and rasps
• A set of calipers
• A tape measure
• A strap wrench
• An oil filter wrench
• An awl or ice pick

Electrical System Tools and Supplies:

These are tools and supplies that are specifically required to diagnose and repair electrical problems on a boat. Wire should be pre-tinned marine-grade stranded wire. Connections should be crimped with adhesive-lined heat shrink terminals.

• A digital multimeter
• An electrical terminal crimping tool
• A butane torch for heat shrink terminals
• Assorted heat shrink terminals
• Some assorted wire in red and yellow. 12 AWG is a very useful size, and can handle a fairly heavy load.
• Electrical tape, a good brand, like 3M
• Spare batteries for equipment aboard—I like the Energizer Lithium AA batteries for flashlights, due to the long use and shelf life
• Spare fuses for any used aboard—I like the mini-blade fuses. Try to standardize the boat to a few types as possible

Rigging Tools and Supplies:

These are the tools and supplies that are specific maintaining a sailboat’s rigging.

• Spare clevis pins, cotter rings and cotter pins
• Some small line, say 1/8-1/4″ for various repairs, lashings, messenger lines, etc.
• A sailmaker’s palm
• Spare sailcloth
• Sail repair tape
• Sailmaker’s needles
• Sail repair thread
• Some stainless steel rings
• Whipping twine
• Beeswax
• Stainless Steel Wire for mousing shackle pins
• A couple of spare blocks of the most common kind used on your boat
• A bosun’s chair
• A good awl
• A good pair of heavy duty scissors
• Extra shackles of the most common sizes used on your boat
• A full set of fids or similar rope-working tools—I prefer the Brion Toss Splicing Wands

A Maintenance and Repair Kit:

These are the supplies you need to re-bed hardware and do basic maintenance and repairs.

• 3M 5200 Fast Cure
• 3M 4000 UV
• A roll of Butyl Tape
• Lanocote
• Loctite (both red and blue)
• Boeshield T9—This is like industrial WD40.
• McLube SailKote
• PBlaster
• Heavy waterproof bearing grease
• An assortment of stainless steel screws, nuts and washers
• Some epoxy putty that sets underwater. Progressive Epoxy Polymers has some really good stuff.
• Some regular epoxy resin and hardener
• Some fiberglass cloth
• Some colloidial fumed silica (Cabo-sil) for thickening the epoxy
• Some disposable gloves—nitrile preferably
• Respirator mask
• Some mixing supplies—cups, containers, sticks, etc.
• Acetone
• Denatured Alcohol

A Plumbing Kit:

These are the supplies you need to keep the plumbing and water-related systems on the boat working properly.

• Teflon Tape
• Plumber’s Putty
• Rescue tape or some other self-fusing silicone tape
• A roll of duct tape
• Stainless steel hose clamps of various sizes—I prefer the AWAB or ABA brand, since they have rolled edges and no perforations in the band, making them less likely to damage the hose.
• Spare hose in the sizes and types you use aboard your boat.
• Wooden bungs in the sizes of the through-hulls aboard the boat—These should be made of softwood with a hole drilled through the fat end with a piece of light line through it to lash them in place and kept in a plastic bag to keep them dry until needed.

Spares and Extra Parts:

Carrying the proper spares will make simple repairs possible, turning what would otherwise be emergencies into relatively routine events.

• Spark plugs for your outboard motors
• Fuel and oil filters
• Impellers for the various pumps aboard
• Rebuild kits for the various pumps aboard, including the head
• Shear pins for outboard motor
• Props for outboard motors, or spare blades if using a composite prop like a Pirahna
• Spare banjo washers for the fuel system fittings

An Emergency Kit—for collisions and de-mastings:

These are really only necessary if going on extended passages.

• Bolt cutters or rigging cutter to cut the mast free
• A few large pieces of marine plywood
• Some epoxy putty that sets underwater. Progressive Epoxy Polymers has some really good stuff.
• A tarp or piece of sail cloth with grommets added to use as a temporary patch for larger holes
• Extra line, in various diameters and lengths
• A small sledge and drift punch to remove clevis pins quickly
• Fiberglass water curing repair tape
• Fiberglass cloth

Miscellaneous Tools I’ve found very useful:

While these aren’t really necessary, they can make life aboard a lot simpler.

• A mechanical pencil—0.5 mm is the most useful size
• An ultrafine tip Sharpie permanent marker
• A pocket multitool, like the Leatherman Core or Surge
• A cordless toolset including a drill, a sawzall, a jigsaw and a circular saw is often very useful
• A random orbital sander is very useful for prepping surfaces for painting, fiberglassing, etc.
• Battery lug crimping tool—the large bolt-cutter like ones, not the cheap hammer driven type.
• Several flashlights, including a headlamp
• A dremel rotary tool is often useful
• A set of taps and dies
• A set of bar clamps
• A pop rivet tool with aluminum and stainless steel rivets up to 3/16″ in diameter
• A Fein Multimaster—this is a recent addition to the toolkit, and seems to be a worthy one
• Loos Pro Tension gauges for your boat’s rigging

The above list is overkill if you’re just daysailing, or weekending, but if you’re coastal cruising it can make the difference between being able to get back or being stuck someplace. However, if you’re planning on venturing off-shore or to more remote areas, you would probably want to include it aboard.

There was a sailor asking me about his mainsheet setup on an on-line forum, and was thinking of using line clutches or line jammers for his mainsheet. I tried to explain that this was both unwise and dangerous. A line clutch or line jammer can take too long to release—and in the case of a main sheet, could result in a knockdown or broach.

Dealing with Dynamic Lines

Dynamic control lines, like sheets generally need to be released fairly quickly in an emergency. The best type of line control mechanism for dynamic control lines are cam cleats or clam cleats. Both clam cleats and cam cleats allow you to easily release the lines being held by them by lifting the lines upwards, out of them.

Cam cleats are often used for sheets and other dynamic control lines, since they can easily be incorporated into blocks, while still allowing fairly easy control of the line. Clam cleats are generally used for smaller lines, and are often seen on dinghies and on sails, where they’re used for leech lines.

Controlling Static Control Lines

Halyards, boom vangs, outhauls, topping lifts and furling lines are relatively static lines, since they aren’t generally adjusted very often. These are probably best controlled using line clutches or line jammers. However, line clutches are better than line jammers for heavily loaded lines, since some line jammers, as well as some poorly designed line clutches, can be difficult to release under load. Spinlock line clutches have this problem.

The best line clutches, in terms of performance and price, are probably the Lewmar line clutches. The use a different mechanism than most of the other line clutches, and seem to cause the least amount of abrasion to lines, as well as give you the most control when easing a heavily loaded line. However, the Lewmar line clutches have the narrowest working range, so your choices of line used are far more limited by them. One important point, if you use Lewmar line clutches—unlike most other brands, the handles on the Lewmars flip open towards the winches, not away…. if you’re used to most other brands, you might end up mounting the line clutches backwards, like my friend Craig did.

Cleats, Clutches and Jammers—What They Look Like

Spinlock PowerCleat

Good for many different kinds of lines, but can only deal with relatively low loads. They can substitute for cam cleats, or lightly loaded line clutches. Unlike a line jammer, the Spinlock PowerCleat has a positive release mechanism.

Cam Cleat

Good for sheets and other control lines that need to be released quickly. Often integrated into fiddle blocks and other block and tackle setups. The plastic jaw versions tend to be kinder to the line, but the metal jaw versions usually are more durable.

Clam Cleat

Good for sheets and other control lines that need to be released quickly, only for fairly small lines. Often found on sails for leech lines.

Jam Cleat

Often used with genoa sheets… not quite as quick to release as cam cleats or clam cleats. These are often used in place of regular cleats, which aren’t being discussed here, but don’t require a cleat hitch to hold the line under normal conditions. For safety’s sake, a cleat hitch should be used if extra security is required.

Line Clutch

Best choice for halyards and other relatively static lines. Usually available in single, double, and triple forms.  Line clutches generally have the highest load capacity of all the line control devices.

Line Jammer

Good for halyards and such, but often have a problem being released under high loads. Line clutches are a bit more sophisticated and a better choice for heavily loaded lines.

On one of the sailing forums I frequent, a poster asked about fender boards. For the cruising sailor, especially one that has to deal with slips that have rough pilings, concrete or stone seawalls or locks, fender boards can prevent a lot of damage to the boat and fenders.

The simplest fender board to make would be to take a piece of pressure treated 8′ long, 2×6 or 2×8 and drill a 1″ hole in the board about two inches down from one long side, and about a foot in. Then drill a 3/8″ hole through the side of the board so it ends in the 1″ hole.

Put a line through the hole and tie a stopper knot in the end. Run the free end (that comes out of the 3/8″ hole) through a fender grommet and a stopper knot just above the fender, so the board is roughly centered on the fender. Leave the rest for tying it to the boat. Then drill two more matching holes on the other long side of the board, and put a shorter piece of line in the hole, tying a stopper knot in the end. Tie the free end of that to the other end of the fender… keeping the fenders in position on the board.

The board will end up looking something like this:

Fenderboard Drawing

The fenders would be on the boat’s side of the board, and tied to the line that holds the fenderboard to the boat, and to the board itself, so they can’t shift or roll out of position too easily. This assumes you’re using fenders that look like this:

image courtesy of sailboatowners.com

Another option would be to make the line that goes into the bottom hole a bit longer, and run it through a fender that looks like this, and tie it to the line coming out of the top hole, that ties to the boat.

Image courtesy of Jimbuoy.com

The advantage of this is that the fenders can roll a bit, which might be a good thing.

One thing you have to do on boats is bed hardware. This has to be done on a regular basis, especially with hardware that is under heavy cycling loads, like cleats. However, using the right sealant can make this task much simpler.

Most people are familiar with silicone caulk, since it is the most commonly used type of caulk in normal household repairs. However, while certain Silicone-based bedding compounds are excellent for bedding ports, most of the time, silicone caulks really serves no useful purpose on a boat beyond bedding ports and covering the ends of cotter pins.

In most cases, on a boat, you want a sealant that will adhere to the two surfaces being joined—whether it is a through-hull and the hull or a cleat and the foredeck. The sealant should have a fair bit of elasticity so that it can stretch when the hardware moves or shifts under load without detaching from either side and breaking the seal.

For deck hardware and through-hulls, countersinking the fastener holes is probably one of the best things you can do, since it gives the sealant a natural place to form an o-ring like seal.

There are four major classes of bedding compounds/sealants used on a boat.

• Polyurethane-based sealants like 3M 4200 and 5200, SikaFlex 291, 292, 295, 296
• Polysulfide-based sealants like LifeCaulk and 3M 101
• Silicone-based sealants, like Dow 295
• Butyl Rubber Glazing tape—this is not butyl rubber caulk

Each of these sealants has specific pros and cons.

Polyurethane-based sealants are basically adhesives with sealant properties. They are often very permanent and have very strong adhesion strength, and can be used both above and below the waterline.

3M 5200, a polyurethane sealant commonly found in marine chandleries, is basically for all intents and purposes a permanent adhesive and should not be used on boats for the most part. 3M 5200 has a bonding strength so high that it can often cause delamination or damage the gelcoat when you try to remove hardware bedded with it.

However, polyurethane sealants have some of the best materials compatibility, so the less aggressive ones, like 3M 4200 are very useful. SikaFlex 291 and 292 are probably better choices, but usually more difficult to find. For bedding ports, Sika 295 or 296 can be used in place of Dow’s 795 Silicone.

Be aware that using a polyurethane sealant can make removing hardware much more difficult than using other sealants. There is a solvent, called DeBond 2000, which can be used to weaken the bond if you need to remove hardware that was bedded with 5200. One other issue with the polyurethane sealants is that they have a relatively short shelf-life, once opened. This is due to their being moisture curing compounds, and once exposed to the moist sea air… they start to cure…and you eventually end-up with a solid tube of cured sealant.

Polysulfide-based sealants are the best general purpose sealants for marine use. They are not as aggressively adhesive as polyurethane-based sealants and generally a bit more elastic and flexible. They can be used both above and below the waterline, like the polyurethane sealants, and are better than polyurethane-based sealants for hardware that has to be re-bedded more frequently.

Polysulfide-based sealants are excellent for bedding wooden items, like rubrails and cockpit coamings, since it adheres fairly well to teak. The fact that these items often need to be removed for periodic re-finishing makes it ideal IMHO.

The main drawback of polysulfide-based sealants is that they tend to attack many common plastics—most commonly acrylic and polycarbonate. They are safe to use on acetal, delrin, nylon, and marelon fittings though. If you’re not sure what the fitting is made of, don’t use polysulfide-based sealants with plastic fittings.

Silicone-based sealants aren’t really sealants IMHO. They’re really gasket materials, and need to have a minimum thickness and be kept under compression to work properly. Silicone-based sealants should only be used in above-the-waterline applications.

The only structural silicone sealant that I generally recommend is Dow 795. This is a structural adhesive which is generally recommended for bedding ports. It is not your common silicone caulk. However, beyond the very specific use of bedding acrylic* ports, it should not be used on boats.

Aside from bedding acrylic and polycarbonate ports, and certain plastic parts, like Beckson ports, and covering the exposed ends of cotter pins—it really has no place on a boat—primarily due to the residual silicone contaminants silicone can leave behind. These contaminants are almost impossible to remove thoroughly, and will prevent other sealants and paints from adhering to the surface properly. Even strong adhesives, like epoxies, have trouble bonding if the surface has silicone contaminants on it.

One other use of silicone is for sealing potable water tanks. However, I highly recommend that you use only NSF approved silicone sealants for potable water tanks and systems. These will not have any toxic components, unlike some of the other marine-grade sealants which may contain isocyanates.

Some silicone sealants are acid-curing and should never be used on metal. These are generally easily detectable by the strong vinegar smell caused by the acetic acid that is contained in them.

The last sealant is butyl rubber glazing tape. This may be one of the most versatile sealants you can use on a boat. However, it has the weakest adhesion and tensile strength and highest elasticity of any of the sealants. It is also the most easily affected by other chemicals, as it doesn’t cure like the other sealants do.

Unfortunately, many petrochemicals and common solvents will dissolve or damage it. Because of its sensitivity to petrochemicals, I generally don’t recommend it be used below the waterline.

It is great for bedding deck hardware, especially things like chainplates, where a certain degree of movement is unavoidable. It has the greatest materials compatibility of all the sealants and is also probably the least expensive of them.

One major advantage of butyl tape, since it doesn’t cure, is the working life. This makes it ideal for bedding things like traveler and genoa fairlead tracks. The lower physical strength of butyl tape generally isn’t an issue due to the large number of fasteners generally used on these tracks.

Other Sealants

Two other sealants of note for marine use are 3M 4000 UV and BoatLife’s LifeSeal.

3M 4000 UV is a polyether based sealant, and as such is generally fairly well suited for use with plastics. However, it is not recommended for below-the-waterline uses. It cures relatively quickly, as it is tack-free in under half-an-hour and cures in 24 hours or so.

BoatLife’s LifeSeal is a hybrid polyurethane/silicone sealant. As such, it isn’t as permanent as a pure polyurethane sealant, but is more an adhesive bedding compound than a pure silicone material. However, it still has many of the contamination issues that any silicone based sealant will have. It also is fairly inelastic, and IMHO, 3M 4000 UV is a better choice.

*Most marine ports should be made of cast acrylic, rather than polycarbonate, due to several physical characteristics that make polycarbonate less suitable. First, polycarbonate tends to deform under load, which can cause it to shear the adhesion of the glazing to the underlying sealant. Second, it is less scratch and UV resistant than acrylic. Third, it is more difficult to find polycarbonate in UV/scratch resistant versions in sizes thicker than 1/4″.

In my opinion, the greatest storm safety device ever created is the Jordan Series Drogue.

The JSD was the brainchild of Don Jordan, a retired aeronautical engineer, in response to the fatalities that were the result of the 1979 Fastnet disaster. I believe that the Jordan Series Drogue is a piece of gear that every sea-going small sailboat should have.

Don Jordan was an aeronautical engineer, who worked for Pratt and Whitney, eventually retiring from his position as chief engineer. He was also a senior lecturer at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for many years. He was a pilot and a life-long sailor. Back when I was getting things setup for the s/v Pretty Gee, I spoke with Don Jordan a number of times regarding the Jordan Series Drogue. I was fortunate enough to get a personal recommendation for the drogue sizing for my boat from Don directly. Unfortunately, Don passed away last year.

What is a Jordan Series Drogue?

It is a safety device for small craft that consists of a long line with a series of small drag cones attached along its length. The JSD for the Pretty Gee consists of a 5/8″ line, 270′ long, with 130 small cones attached to it. It has 15′ of 5/16″ chain on the terminal end as a weight. It is connected to the boat by a bridle that is 45′ long. It looks like this:

Photo courtesy of Sail Magazine’s article on series drogues and sea anchors.

How Does a Jordan Series Drogue Work?

How the Jordan Series Drogue works is best explained by Don Jordan himself, on a website that he helped develop about the Jordan Series Drogue. Please visit the Jordan Series Drogue website to find out more about this ingenious device.

Who Makes the Jordan Series Drogue?

There are several ways to get or make a Jordan Series Drogue. First, you can get the materials and make them yourself. Buying a kit is often easier, if a bit more expensive. Both Ace Sailmakers and SailRite make and sell either the cones alone or complete kits, including the cones and double braid line, for making Jordan Series Drogues to cover a series of different size boats. Ace Sailmakers will also make complete drogues as well.

Why Use a Jordan Series Drogue, instead of a Parachute Sea Anchor?

Well, there are quite a few reasons to use a Jordan Series Drogue over a parachute sea anchor. Here are a few of the more important ones IMHO.

First, the Jordan Series drogue was developed and tested in conjunction with the US Coast Guard, and was specifically designed for helping small sailcraft survive in storm conditions, like those found during the 1979 Fastnet disaster that was Jordan’s primary motivation for developing the series drogue. It has been proven to work very successfully and protect boats using it from damage during its deployment.

Second, due to the change in boat design, most boats are far more stable when using a drogue than when using a sea anchor. Don Jordan has an interesting post about this on the Jordan Series Drogue site, and there is no reason to think that the forces that apply to a sailboat at anchor would not also apply to a sailboat lying to a sea anchor.

Third, the overall forces that are generated by a Jordan Series Drogue are lower and the peak shock loading forces that the boat is subjected to is far lower by design. The design of the JSD allows it to gradually increase the resistance applied to the boat as the rode becomes more heavily loaded—and doesn’t have the issues with collapsing and suddenly re-deploying a parachute sea anchor does.

Fourth, Don Jordan had no financial interest in selling or making the Jordan Series Drogue, as he put the idea and patents for it into the public domain after developing it. Some of the oft-cited information sources that tout the superiority of the parachute sea anchor type devices are a bit less than honest IMHO.

How to Install, Deploy and Retrieve the Jordan Series Drogue

Installing the JSD

Prior to setting off on a blue water passage, your boat should be outfitted with dedicated chainplates for the Jordan Series Drogue. These chainplates should be mounted fairly low and as far outboard and aft on the hull of the boat as possible. They should be tied into the structure of the boat as securely as the chainplates for the rigging.

The bridle should be about three times as long as the distance between the chainplates. If the transom is 12′ wide, the bridle for the Jordan Series Drogue should be about 36′. This should give you sufficient length for the splices and to terminate the bridle lines properly. Ideally, one end of the bridle should be an eyesplice that is connected to the eyesplice at the end of the drogue by running the bridle line through the drogue’s eyesplice and then through its own eyesplice so the bridle line forms a larkshead knot around the drogue line.

The other end should be spliced around a thimble and connected to the chainplate via a heavy shackle. Ideally, the bridle legs should be run through tubular polyester webbing to protect them from UV damage and chafe. These lines should be left permanently connected while on any bluewater passage.

The Jordan Series Drogue should be flaked into a bag or container, starting with the bridle end. This should leave the terminal end, with the weight, on top of the drogue line, and allow the drogue to be deployed by simple dropping the drogue’s terminal end into the water.

Deploying the Jordan Series Drogue

Make sure the drogue line is free and clear to run out before doing anything else, because as soon as you release the weight to deploy the drogue—you are committed to it… as the small cones will start to fill and increase the load on the drogue line. When conditions deteriorate to the point you feel the Jordan Series Drogue should be deployed, you should drop the weight and terminal end of the drogue into the water and let the drogue run out.

Check to see that the bridle legs lead fair and then head down below and batten down the hatches. If you’ve setup the chainplates, bridle and drogue properly, chafe should not be an issue. Don Jordan designed the series drogue to be an “ejection seat” for the sailor… where you deploy it and then wait for the ride to end. It shouldn’t require the crew to do much more than keep a watch. No active steering or other crew participation should be required once the series drogue has been deployed, allowing the crew to rest, eat, and restore themselves.

Retrieving the Jordan Series Drogue

This is one of the more difficult things to do. Don Jordan wrote:

I recommend that you deploy the drogue in fair weather to get a feel for the
launching and retrieval. You will need two winches and two helper lines. See website.

I mention this because one skipper recently cut the drogue loose after a
successful ride in a storm because he could not get it back — no excuse
for this . Don

Now, I’ve tried out my series drogue several times and came up with a pretty good solution for retrieving it. What you will need are the following:

• Two lines about twice the LOA of your boat, with a stopper knot tied in about two feet from one end, and one about halfway down the line.
• Two snatch blocks attached to the base of the bow pulpit

The procedure is to run the lines forward to the snatch blocks and back to the genoa winches. The winches should be free, since you probably won’t have any sail up if you’ve resorted to a Jordan Series Drogue.

1. Tie the end of the port line with the stopper knot to the series drogue rode with a rolling hitch. This will allow you to winch about a boat length of series drogue aboard the boat. Watch out and make sure you don’t snag the cones on anything while you’re winching it aboard.
2. Then tie the end of the starboard line with the stopper knot to the series drogue rode with a rolling hitch.
3. Next, go forward and untie the first line rolling hitch and bring it back to the cockpit.
4. Then winch in the second line, and tie the end of the port line to the series drogue rode again and repeat.

On most boats, the series drogue and bridle will be about a dozen boat lengths long or so. So, you only have to do this six times to retrieve it. It is even simpler if you’re sailing with a second person, since they can be moving forward and retrieving the lines, while you’re winching in the drogue. This method also minimizes the amount of time spent tying and untying the knots.

The Jordan Series Drogue and Trip Lines

I asked Don about using a trip line on the JSD… he did not recommend it. As he explained it, the problem is that if the trip line and the JSD rode twist, it could compromise the JSD by fouling the small cones and preventing them from opening properly.

When the boat is not in motion because of the waves, the JSD will usually extend nearly straight down from the stern of the boat. As the boat starts to move, the cones start load up as the road becomes more heavily loaded. When the JSD is vertical like that, it could easily twist and foul the trip line.

Multihulls have some advantages and disadvantages compared to monohulls, and a lot of how severe those advantages/disadvantages are depends on the exact design you’re looking at. Whether one will be suitable for your purposes depends a lot on what you’re trying to do.

For instance, a lot of the charter market catamarans have trouble sailing in light air and have trouble tacking. This is because these boats were designed with the charter market in mind and are fairly low performance designs, with smaller sailplans and relatively high windage to accommodate a floating condo interior.

Compare them to a high-performance cruising catamaran like a Chris White Atlantic 48 or Gunboat 48, and you’ll see some serious differences in the design and performance characteristics of the boats.

What are the advantages of a cruising multihull?

• They sail flatter, which means they’re more comfortable in many conditions and often safer. It is harder to fall off a 20’ wide catamaran that heels less than 10˚ than it is to fall off a monohull that is 12’ wide and heeling 25˚.
• They’re often faster than comparable LOA monohulls
• They often haver far more cabin space than comparable LOA monohulls
• They generally have a quicker motion than monohulls—which some people tolerate better
• They’re often designed to be close to unsinkable, since the materials they’re made of are often lighter than water.
• They often can gunkhole and sail/anchor in shallower waters than comparable LOA monohulls due to having relatively shallow draft.

Disadvantages of multihulls:

• They can’t support as much food, water, cargo or equipment as monohulls of equal LOA.
• They’re more weight sensitive than monohulls—when you’re carting around several tons of lead, what does a couple hundred more pounds of gear matter.
• Badly designed ones don’t sail well in light winds or tack well.
• Badly designed ones generally don’t sail faster than comparable LOA monohulls
• They don’t self-right—however, monohulls sink—this is basically a wash, with an advantage to the multihull, since I’d rather be on a floating upside down boat, than a boat that is right-side up and sitting on the bottom of the ocean

Myths:

There is a long-standing myth that multihulls can’t sail to windward or tack well. This is obviously false. The Polynesian islanders explored most of the southern Pacific, and much of it to windward. Also, Dennis Conner’s Stars and Stripes pretty much put the whole idea that multihulls can’t point and can’t tack to bed.

There’s also a myth that catamarans or trimarans are less expensive boats than monohulls of comparable LOA. That’s basically pure crap. Think about it, you’re building two or three hulls and the structures to connect them. A multihull can often be a less expensive boat for a given performance specification, but given the same LOA, the multihulls are generally more expensive, not less.

As an example, my relatively slow cruising trimaran often passes 40’ monohull sailboats. The monohull sailboats that are as fast as my 28’ trimaran are many times the cost of it. However, compared to some of the boats with comparable LOA, it is probably slightly more expensive.

Then there’s the myth that multihulls aren’t seaworthy. This is also pure crap. A properly designed and constructed multihull is very seaworthy. If you don’t believe that, see the most recent speed records for sailing around the world and see what they were set by. Most of them are set by trimarans. This myth comes from the period when many were home-built, using cheap materials and poorly constructed. Many of the multihulls from that time were and are junk.

Different types of multihulls:

There are basically three types of common multihulls. They are the proa, the catamaran and the trimaran.

The Proa:

The least common of these is the proa. A proa is a boat that consists of a main hull with a single smaller outrigger.

There are two types of proas. The Pacific Proa, called that since it was developed and is traditional to the Polynesian Islands, has a ballasted outrigger or ama that is kept to windward. The Atlantic Proa uses a single outrigger or ama that is kept to leeward—essentially a trimaran without the windward ama.

Most do not have a bow or stern in the traditional sense, since the outrigger is kept to windward or leeward all the time. The boat is not tacked, but shunted, where what was formerly the bow becomes the stern and the rudder is moved from one end of the boat to the other.

Generally, the Pacific proa has a crab-claw sail and the mast, by design is in the center of the main hull. A crab-claw sail looks very much like an oversized lateen rig with a boom added. The Atlantic Proa often has more traditional sail plans.

The Pacific Proa generally has the least cargo carrying capacity of all the multihull designs. The Atlantic Proa has a bit more cargo carrying capacity, but usually less than a trimaran due to having fewer hulls.

The Catamaran:

Catamarans are boats that have two equal size hulls and a bridgedeck connecting the two hulls. The hulls are often asymetrical mirror images of each other and can have shallow keels, centerboards, daggerboards or a combination of keel and board of some sort. They generally have dual rudders, one on each hull, and in the case of large cruising catamarans, often have dual engines and props.

Catamarans, generally, have the most space of the common sailing designs—monohull, catamaran and trimaran. However, they are weight sensitive, and utilizing all the stowage space they provide can hinder the boat’s performance.

Many people are first introduced to catamarans in the form of sport beach cats, like the Hobie Cat. This is somewhat misleading, as the characteristics of a beach sport cat and a cruising catamaran are very, very different. A sport cat has a very high sail area to displacement ratio and is extremely easy to capsize. They go like a bat out of hell, and capsize if you look at them cross-eyed. A cruising catamaran, especially the larger ones have extremely high initial stability and righting moments and are very, very difficult to capsize if sailed properly.

There are basically two different schools of thought for cruising catamarans. The first is like those designed by James Wharram, one of the catamaran design pioneers. Most of his catamarans have little or no structure on the bridgedeck that connects the main hulls. In many cases, his boats are designed with two hulls that are connected together in a somewhat flexible manner. All of the accommodations are in the two hulls.

These boats often have fairly decent sailing characteristics, since they don’t generally have the windage created by a bridgedeck cabin. Stars & Stripes was designed much along these spartan lines, but with a very rigid bridgedeck and hull structure for performance reasons.

The other school of thought is the solid bridgedeck design with a cabin over the bridgedeck. This can be taken to extremes that result in very poor performing boats. However, most modern catamarans come from this school of thought. Compromises have to be made to balance performance and accommodation. Things like sufficient bridgedeck clearance, beam, cabin height, draft, and such are all important and need to be balanced depending on the design’s intended use.

Some boats have a solid bridgedeck from bow to stern. However, this is less common in modern designs, since having an open design for the forward third of the bridgedeck seems to have significant benefits—so you’ll generally see some form of nets or trampolines forward of the main cabin on many more modern designs.

The beam of a modern catamaran is often 50-60% of the LOA. Generally, the smaller the LOA the higher the beam to length ratio is, but there are exceptions, like the Tony Smith designed Geminis, which have a relatively narrow 14’ beam. This was done to help allow the Geminis to be kept in a single slip, rather than requiring them to use two slips or an end slip.

One major issue with catamarans is the rig. Unlike Trimarans and Proas, the catamaran doesn’t have any hull to anchor the mast to. This means that the bridgedeck has to be engineered to withstand the loads caused by the mast. On some smaller, often home-built, catamarans, this issue is avoided by equipping the catamaran with a bi-plane rig, where the boat has two masts, with one located in each hull.

Most catamarans are sloop or cutter rigged.

The Trimaran:

The trimaran consists of a large main hull and two smaller outriggers. Often, the outriggers or amas, have sufficient buoyancy to float the entire vessel in and of themselves. The hulls on a trimaran tend to be fairly long and narrow, and as such, the trimaran often has the least space of the three common designs, less than monohulls of equal LOA. They also tend to be more weight sensitive than catamarans and monohulls.

The trimarans are basically divided into two categories, IMHO. There are racing designs and cruising designs. The racing designs are often designed to have one of the two amas airborne when under sail. They’re often very light and very fast, with little in the way of amenities. The cruising designs generally aren’t designed to have any of the hulls leave the water, and are a good deal slower due to the greater wetted hull surfaces.

A good example of the two different design philosophies are the Corsair 28 and the Telstar 28. The Corsair 28 is about the same LOA as the Telstar, but has a much smaller and lighter cabin. The Corsair 28 doesn’t have standing headroom in its cabin, and is designed with a portapottie and camping stove as standard accommodations. The Telstar 28 on the other hand has almost 6’ of headroom throughout most of the cabin, a head with holding tank, and a proper propane stove/broiler, optional refrigerator and sink. The Telstar also has a bit less sail area than the lighter Corsair 28. One is clearly a racer and the other a cruiser.

Of the cruising trimarans, there are basically two different schools of thought. One, like the older Jim Brown designed Searunners, has accomodations in the wingdecks that connect the main hull to the amas. These boats are far heavier and have much more windage than the more modern designs, like the Chris White Hammerhead 54, which has all the accommodations in the main hull. There are some boats that bridge these two designs, like the Dick Newick designs, which have much smaller solid wingdecks with very limited accommodations and space contained within.

Trimarans, often have better sailing and performance characteristics than do catamarans. They generally sail a lot more like monohulls, since they heel a bit more and can often pivot on their main hull.

Many of the smaller sport designs, like the Corsairs and the Telstar, fold to allow them to be trailerable without disassembly. However, the folding design generally sacrifices interior space.

The beam on most trimarans is about 60-75% or so, but there are extreme examples, like BMW-Oracle’s new trimaran which has essentially a square footprint, with a beam to length ratio of 100%.

Most trimarans are sloop or cutter rigged. Some use rotating wing-masts, but many do not. Some are ketch or yawl rigged. Most use stayed masts, and take advantage of the wider staying base of the multihull design. Some use an unstayed free-standing mast design, but these are not that common.

Multihull Construction:

One thing I’d point out is that the scantlings on multihulls is very different from that of monohulls. Multihulls are often lighter in construction in some ways, due to the lack of need to haul around several tons of ballast. There are basically two different methods of constructing modern multihulls generally.

Cold Molded Wood Composite

The first is what Chris White and the Gougeon brothers have done. That is cold-molded laminated wood composite construction. This generally consists of laying up multiple, very thin layers of wood and laminating them together using epoxy. The wood is often finished off by a covering of fiberglass to give it some added durability, but the bulk of the strength is in the cold molded lamination of the wood, not the fiberglass skin, which is effectively just a surface treatment.

Cold-molded wood composite boats tend to be very rigid and fairly light. One major advantage of cold-molded wood composite is the very high fatigue resistance that the wood construction provides. Properly built, these hulls are almost as low maintenance as a fiberglass hull.

Cored Fiberglass Laminate

The second is cored laminate construction. The most common core materials are PVC foams like Divinylcell and Airex, and end-grain balsa, like Contourcore. In this construction, the strength of the material is the fiberglass or composite skins, and the core adds to the strength and lightness of the laminate.

This is not the same thing as the cold-molded wood composite that I mentioned previously—the main difference being the thin veneers of wood used in the previous method are essentially encapsulated and thoroughly saturated in epoxy, which is not the case with cored fiberglass construction—where the resin is only used to bind the skin to the core material, but does not generally saturate the core material.

Highly loaded areas are often given additional strength via the use of carbon fiber or kevlar. The hulls are often given an inner layer of kevlar to increase the puncture resistance.

Unsinkability

Most modern multihulls, due to the two methods of construction mentioned above, are fairly buoyant and because of the lack of heavy ballast, generally lighter than water over all. If you combine the overall buoyant materials used in constructing the modern multihull with multiple hulls, often with multiple, independent water-tight compartments—you basically end up with an nearly unsinkable boat. I’d point out that

There’s a brand new sailing forum online now called Anything Sailing.

It was founded by three sailors that were tired of seeing threads about faulty products censored.  One of the sailors is a good friend of mine and sails a custom 42′ racing sailboat with a 10′ draft.  The other two I know from other on-line forums, and are pretty good people.

I hope you’ll give the forum a shot.  It’s been up about a week now, and already has over 200 members.  Not too bad for a forum that’s been growing only by word of mouth. It has a pretty good base of threads already, including some excellent posts by another friend of mine, Maine Sail, whose work puts most of the professional publications to shame.

As usual, I’d like to wish all my readers a Happy Valentine’s Day.

I’d also like to wish Gee a happy birthday, and remember the very special woman I married on this day.  I still think that Woo, Gee’s best friend, said it best:

Yet we get to know her and love her and be loved by her….how privileged are we.

This come from an e-mail I wrote Woo in November of 2001.

Dear Woo—

The real problem is Gee is the best person I’d ever met.  It is as simple, and no more profound, than  that.  We were a perfect fit for each other.  She was warm, and thoughtful, and funny.  She could make me laugh when no one else could.  That I found her, really convinced me that it isn’t all just random chance, but that there is such a thing as fate.  From the first time I heard her voice, I knew that I loved her and always had—I knew that I had found what I had been looking for all my life.  I never felt as comfortable around a person as I did with Gee…no need to pretend I was someone I wasn’t…no need to hide who I really was.  She loved me perfectly—even for all my imperfections—with out any conditions or reasons.

Her fierceness and strength were two of the things I loved most about her.  She was a sweet, funny, intelligent and beautiful person.  She could be stubborn and frustrating—and she did things that drove me crazy—but I wouldn’t have changed a thing.  The thing that really showed me how much strength she had was the day after her surgery in May of last year.  She had been in surgery for nine-and-a-half hours…and yet, the next day she got up out of bed and walked.

I’ve never been so lost before, not even when my twin died.  I never ever thought that I would miss someone more that my identical twin…but that was before I met Gee.  The pain inside is like someone stabbed an icicle into my heart.  The real anger and sadness I feel for Gee isn’t for me—or even for my loss of her–but for the unfairness of what happened to her—that she had to go through all the pain and suffering.  I would give anything for just one more day with her but I know that’s just not possible.  The greater sadness I feel is for all the people that never got a chance to meet her.

Although the time we had together was really quite brief…in many ways our love and life together was like the light of a magnesium flare…something that is so pure, bright and perfect—even from the beginning–the brightest, whitest and purest light..and for the short time it exists it only grow brighter….but then fades to darkness…  I know that many people spend all of their lives searching for a love like that and never find it, and in that at least, I am luckier than most.  Even with all the hardships of her illness, we both made the best of what we had together.

I wish I had more photos of Gee and me.  I also wish that she had written me more…but writing letters was never her strong point. I also wish I could really know if I had done everything I could.  I guess I still have doubts whether I did everything right or not.  I also wish we had had just more time together…there are so many things we still wanted to do…

It has been almost eight years since Gee has been gone, and over seven years since I wrote the words above, yet they still describe how I feel perfectly.  If you are new to reading my blog, I would recommend you read my Life with Gee pages to understand who Gee was, and how lucky I was to have her in my life.

Right now, I’m heading off to the marina check on the boat that I named after Gee.

My friend Dave found this photo on an archived drive of his.  Its the first photo I took of Gee from back when we had just gotten engaged.  It was taken in her apartment in Seattle, right after we drove cross country in September 1999. This was great because I didn’t have a copy of this photo due to a hard drive crash about three weeks later.

Gee and Dan at Gee’s new apartment in Seattle.

Recently, I wrote a post on a sailing forum about the 25 Watt solar panel I added to the s/v Pretty Gee to act as a maintenance charger for the boat, while it is stored on the hard for the winter. On one of the forums, I was asked if a charge controller was needed. I thought I’d write a post that includes a modified copy of my response to the question here, as an expanded article on solar power on boats in general.

Solar Power on Boats

On many cruising sailboats there is a need for passive electrical generation of some sort. The need for passive electrical generation is obvious—there are power requirements for any boat that is in use—refrigeration, radio, lighting, etc. While these electrical needs could be met using a generator or running the engine, it really doesn’t make much sense to do so, as the long-term costs of doing so, in fuel and maintenance, are much higher than if passive generation methods are used. Using a generator or the boat’s engine will require the boat to re-fuel more often, which is not always desirable or even possible on longer cruises. A good passive electrical generation system will make the boat far more self-sufficient.

There are three forms that passive electrical generation on a small cruising sailboat can take: wind, water and solar generation—and of these, only solar and wind are of use when at a dock, mooring or at anchor. In this article, I’m only going to be discussing solar generation.

Types of Solar Panels

There are basically three types of solar panels, which I generally group in to two distinct categories.

The first category are the rigid panels—which include both the mono-crystalline and poly-crystalline types of solar panels. These are characterized by having individual cells that are linked in series and mounted in a rigid frame with a glass protective cover. Mono-crystalline and poly-crystalline panels are generally much more efficient than the second category of panels—semi-rigid or flexible panels.

The second type are the semi-rigid or flexible solar panels—which are also known as amorphous silicon solar panels. These types of panels are often called thin-film panels, since the panels are made by depositing a thin film of silicon onto conductive substrate and creating the solar panel from that. There is no crystalline structure to the silicon used in making these panels. These panels are usually semi-rigid—often made using a stainless steel sheet as the base layer—but there have been flexible versions of them as well. They are often durable enough that they can be walked on, with some care. They do not have individual cells, a rigid frame or a glass cover and are much less efficient than their rigid cousins. However, in low-light and shaded conditions, they do tend to perform better.

What Kind of Panels Should I Use

On most smaller sailboat, the rigid panels are generally used. This is often due to a lack of space, and needing to get the greatest amount of power generation for the space used. These panels are often mounted above dinghy davits on the stern of the boat, or on top of the bimini or dodger.

Larger boats, especially some of the big racing boats, often use the semi-rigid panels, as they are more durable, and the boats are large enough to use the less efficient panels. These semi-rigid panels are often mounted right on the cabin top, as they are durable to walk on to a limited degree.

Some boats use a mix of semi-rigid and rigid panels. However, if you do this, the panels should be grouped by type, with separate charge controllers for the two different types, due to the differences in the panel sensitivity under different lighting conditions.

Do I Need a Charge Controller

Chances are more than likely that you’ll need a charge controller, unless you’re using a very small 5-10 Watt maintenance type panel.

The basic rule of thumb is that if the panels approximate daily output is more than 1/60 of the bank’s rated amp-hour capacity, then a charge controller is probably necessary so that the panel doesn’t boil off the batteries.

For example, a 25 Watt panel puts out about 1.39 amps. The daily output is about 6.95 amps. So, unless your battery bank is larger than 417 amp-hours in size…you would need a charge controller. This is especially the case if you’re using AGM or Gel type batteries. However, using a charge controller makes a lot of sense for two major reasons.

First, they will protect the batteries from discharging back into the solar panels at night. Solar panels, unless connected using a blocking diode—which drops their effective voltage output about a volt—will discharge the batteries at night. Using a charge controller basically prevents this from happening, and not needing to use a blocking diode increases the effective output of the panel.

Second, a charge controller will also help protect and condition the batteries as they charge them. A battery goes through three phases of charging—bulk, absorption and float—as the charge level of the battery changes. An intelligent charge controller—like the FlexCharge NC25a, will manage the panels output, which can be as high as 20 volts on a shade-resistant panel, and drop it down to the voltage levels required by the battery—depending on what the charge state the battery is at. Many of these can also help condition the batteries. Some charge controllers even have the ability to “equalize” the batteries. Some are pulse-width modulation based. Others, like the NC25a, are not.

Types of Charge Controllers

First, there are dumb charge controllers. Don’t waste your money on these—they’re just not worth it. These usually use just a relay or shunt transistors to vary the voltage levels, and most only can do one or two-stage charging. They basically short the panel out when the batteries are “fully charged”.

Second, there are three-or-four stage smart charge controllers, like the NC25A I mentioned above. It is a non-PWM (pulse width modulation)-type three-stage intelligent charge controller and it looks like this.

Photo of a Flexcharge NC25A charge controller, courtesy of FlexCharge

Companies, like Morningstar, make PWM-based three-stage charge controllers that are comparably priced. There are debates as to which charging method is better. I have used and like the NC25a, and keep the one I own on the boat as a backup if my MPPT charge controller fails.

Third, are the MPPT-type charge controllers. These are the best of the breed. Morningstar, BlueSky, and Outback make versions that are suitable for marine use. The major difference between an MPPT-type charge controller and a PWM-type three-stage charge controller is intelligence, as most of the MPPT-type charge controllers are based on a three-stage PWM-type controller core. MPPT charge controllers do this by trading voltage for amperage, or amperage for voltage. Using an MPPT charge controller will often yield a 15-30% increase in efficiency for your solar panel charging system. The FlexCharge NC25A was replaced by a BlueSky SB2000E MPPT-type charge controller. You’ll see why in a second.

Why Use an MPPT-type Charge Controller?

Very simply put, an MPPT-type charge controller will increase the efficiency of your solar panel system. This may allow you to be more self-sufficient, and reduce your need to run the engine or a generator. It may allow you to get by with a smaller solar panel array than you could otherwise.

It does this by making more efficient use of the electricity generated by the solar panels and minimizing the amount that is wasted as heat. What follows are two examples of how an MPPT-type charge controller can increase the effective output of a solar panel.

An example*: Normally a 25 Watt panel will be outputting 1.39 amps at 18 volts. 18 volts is too high for the batteries to charge with, since bulk charging requires only 14.4 volts. With a normal three-stage controller, the excess voltage is shed as heat—that’s why the charge controllers heat up so much. 18-14.4=3.6 volts—3.6 volts * 1.39 amp = 5 watts. So you’re losing about 5 watts out of 25 watts to heat.

With a MPPT-type controller, it uses a high-frequency DC-to-DC converter to drop the voltage down to 14.4 volts, but increases the amperage to 1.74 amps at the same time. So, instead of getting 6.95 amp-hours from the panel for the day, assuming about five hours of full output, you get 8.70 amp-hours, or a 25% effective increase in amp-hours to the batteries. This makes a lot of sense, since you’re basically recovering the 5 watts that was being lost to heating the three-stage, non-MPPT, charge controller.

Another thing most MPPT-type controllers will do is trade amps for volts, if necessary.

An example*: If the panel is partially shaded, the output voltage on it will drop. Say the output drops to only 12 volts, at 1.39 amps, because a third of the panel is shaded. Normally, this would just be lost as the three-stage controller can’t use it to charge the battery, which requires 14.4 volts to charge. Some MPPT-type controller will take the 12 volts at 1.39 amps and convert it to 14.4 volts at 1.16 amps. Now, instead of getting ZERO amp-hours, due to insufficient voltage to charge the batteries, you’re now getting 5.8 amp-hours for the day. Not too bad, is it??

How Large an Array Do You Need?

The size of the array you need really depends on what your purpose in having solar panels is. The three typical setups are maintenance, charging and self-sufficiency.

Maintenance

Some people just want a small maintenance charging system to keep the batteries topped off when they’re away from the boat—usually so they don’t need to leave a shorepower system connected and running. This type of usage is going require the panels be sized according to the basic losses of the unoccupied boat.

Typically, the loads that this type of panel has to make up for are the bilge pump, the internal self-discharge of the batteries, the memory feature on the electronics, etc. The bilge pump and the self-discharge are probably the biggest considerations. If the boat is a well-kept, dry boat, then the bilge pump usage should be minimal. The self-discharge losses can be as high as 1% of the battery bank capacity per day in warmer climates for wet-cell batteries.

In general, the maintenance panels are 30 Watts and under in size, unless the boat has an extremely large battery bank. Going with AGM or gel batteries can reduce this significantly, as they self-discharge far less than wet-cell batteries.

For instance, say the boat has a stereo that draws .01 amp per hour for the memory feature, and a small maintenance bilge pump that draws 6 amps per hour, which typically runs for about 30 minutes per day. The house battery bank is a 450 amp-hour bank consisting of four T105 six-volt golf cart batteries. The daily losses would be .24 amp-hours for the stereo, 3 amp-hours for the bilge pump and 4.5 amp-hours for the batteries. or 7.74 amp-hours total. The average solar panel can give you approximately five hours at its full rated amperage, so we need 7.75 amp-hours/5-hours or 1.55 amps per hour from the panel. A 25 watt solar panel can generate about 1.7 amps per hour, which gives us a bit of extra capacity to account for the less than perfect days, and should handle the maintenance requirements for the boat under most conditions.

Charging

Often, similar to the maintenance charging setups, people who mainly sail on the weekends and keep the boat on a unpowered dock or at a mooring, will want a solar panel setup that can top off the batteries over the course of the week so that the boat is ready to go for the weekend. This setup requires a bit more in the way of calculations, since you need to estimate what your average weekend usage is, and add that to the basic losses covered by a maintenance type setup.

What you’ll really need to do to start with is figure out what your realistic daily electrical budget is. The daily electrical usage can be expressed in amp-hours, since the voltage for the system is usually fixed at 12 or 24 VDC. So, you take the amperage a piece of equipment uses, and multiply it by the average amount of time you’re going to use it per day. Add all the amp-hours to get a rough daily usage.

Generally, the biggest users of electricity are electronics–like laptops, radios, TV—lights, and refrigeration. Underway, your instruments and running lights become factors. I recommend doing separate budgets for underway and at anchor/mooring/docked. Use whichever of the two numbers is higher as the base number for your calculations.

If you’re planning on being out for a weekend. you’d want to have the solar panel daily output be roughly 1/3 your daily usage, so that the panels can recharge the batteries over the course of the week. Say your weekend usage is as follows:

• Anchor light two nights—2 amps x 20 hours,
• vhf radio in receive mode for 12 hours—12 hours x 1 amp,
• Engel MT27 refrigerator for two days, 25% cycle time at 2.3 amps or 12 hours x 2 amps,
• two cabin lights for four hours each night or 4 hours x 4 amps,
• Stereo for nine hours or 9 hours x 2 amps
• GPS for 12 hours or 12 hours x .5 amps.
• ST1000 autopilot for six hours or 6 hours x 1 amp, and
• running lights for three hours or 3 hours x 4 amps.

This assumes you’re sailing about six hours each day, using running lights for about quarter of the sailng time, using the autopilot for about half the sailing time, and staying up about four hours past sunset each night. This also assumes you’re not motoring for any significant period of time.

This gives you a total of 134 amp-hours for both days or 67 amp-hours per day. This means your panels need to generate about 25 amp-hours per day or roughly five amps per hour. Five amps x 15 volts is 75 watts. That means you need about an 80 watt solar panel. I’ve rounded up to give the system a bit extra charging capacity and because 80 watt panels are very common, and to help account for the maintenance losses seen above.

Self Sufficiency

If you’re planning on cruising long-term, you’ll probably want to be as close to completely self-sufficient as possible when it comes to electrical usage. Unless you’re very lucky, you’ll probably need a combination of wind and solar to do this. Given the daily usage from above, which will tend to be a bit high, as most cruising sailors are at anchor a majority of the time, and the running lights and autopilot aren’t in use at anchor. This is offset slightly by the fact that when they are on a passage, they are sailing 24×7, and will be using the autopilot or a wind vane a good deal more than a weekend coastal cruiser.

They would need to generate about 70 amp-hours per day, based on the 67 amp-hours calculated above. This number is probably a bit high for most smaller sailboats, as LED-navigation and cabin lighting can really help reduce the electrical demands. 70 amp-hours works out to about 14 amps per hour, given the five hour average full output. 14 amps x 15 volts = 210 watts. Two 130 watt panels will provide a good cushion, since each is capable of providing about 9 amps per hour, especially if the system is built around an MPPT-type charge controller. Adding a wind generator to this setup would give the boat charging capability for overcast or stormy days.

*Please note: these are simplified examples that assume a few things, like no charging or MPPT-controller losses, but will give you a good idea of what is going on.

Where to Mount the Solar Panels?

Solar panels really need to be mounted where they will have a minimum of shading.  Shading drastically cuts the power output of monocrystalline and polycrystalline panels, but does not affect amorphous silicon thin-film panels as much.  Ideally, the panels will be mounted somewhere they will be out of the way of the boat’s lines and equipment during sailing—so that the panels do not have to be de-mounted when you want to sail, and located in an area that is relatively free of shading.

The main cabin top is generally a lousy location for solar panels.  The rigging, the mast, the boom and the sails all create shadows over the cabintop to some degree.  The foredeck has similar issues and the panels are generally in the way of the genoa sheets.  On center cockpit boats, the aft cabin top is often a good location for solar panels, unless there is a mizzen mast.

Another good location is on top of the cockpit bimini—which is often a good out of the way location that allows a fairly sizeable solar array to be mounted.  However, this requires that the boom be fairly high above the bimini, or the boom has a good chance of seriously damaging the solar panels. On my boat, the boom just barely clears the bimini—so it would not be a feasible location for me.

A third location that often works is on the stern rail or arch, or dinghy davits.  This is usually unshaded and out of the way. Again, if the boat has a mizzen mast, this is likely not going to be ideal.  On larger boats, the davits or arch can support several large panels with ease.  However, some boats use the stern arch for the mainsheet traveler, which would exclude them from having a solar panel array located there.

On multihulls, you will often have a few more options that aren’t available on a monohull.  On my boat, the solar panels mount to rails that run between the amas and the cockpit pushpit railings.  This keeps them out of the way for the most part, and fairly clear of shading. Currently, I have one 130 Watt panel mounted to the starboard side of the boat, and it can keep up with the refrigerator and other normal use.  I also have a smaller 25 Watt panel mounted to the cockpit railing which was used as a maintenance panel over the winter.  I will be adding a second 130 Watt panel to port later this year.

This winter, I decided to store the s/v Pretty Gee outdoors.

Since my marina doesn’t allow you to keep a boat plugged in, I decided to add a small solar panel to keep the batteries topped off, so I ordered a small 25-Watt panel from Harbor Freight.  While I have two large solar panels, I felt that they were overkill for what is basically maintenance charging, and they require the amas to be extended to mount them.

I had some rail mounts similar to the kind I used for the large panels, and used them to mount the panel to the port side cockpit rail.  With the MPPT charge controller, I’ve been getting over 1.8 amps per hour in the middle of the day with the small panel—or about 9 amp-hours a day.  For the sailing season, I think I’m going to keep this small panel on the top of the stern arch.

Here’s a photo of the setup.

25-Watt Maintenance Solar Panel Setup

Currently, I am reading Michael Pollan’s Omnivore’s Dilemma. I am about halfway through the book.  Thus far, this is a fascinating book that takes a look at America’s modern food supply chain and how it has been corrupted by the oil, chemical, pharmaceutical industries and government intervention because of political, corporate and military reasons.

The first part of the book deals with the highly-efficient monoculture production of corn in this country and how unnatural the production process is. Pollan examines how corn became so important that we should subsidize growing it in spite of all the environmental problems a corn-based agricultural system causes. Pollan looks at the unmentioned externalities that America’s industrial food supply chain has imposed and the costs to the environment, the planet, the health and well-being of the American people, which never seem to be mentioned in the mass media.

An interesting analysis of a McDonalds dinner for his family of three shows how prevalent corn has become in the modern diet of highly processed foods.  The meal, which consisted of a Cobb salad with Caesar dressing, a classic cheeseburger, two orders of large fries, a large coke, an order of Chicken McNuggets, a double-thick vanilla shake, and a dessert of freeze-dried ice cream pellets, based on mass spectrometer analysis, broke down as having corn as the primary ingredient in some form as follows:

Soda—100%, milk shake—78%, salad dressing—65%, chicken nuggets—56%, cheeseburger—52%, and french fries—23%.

The soda is primarily high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), so that really isn’t a big surprise.  The milk shake has a large portion of HFCS as well as cellulose, probably derived from the corn plant as well. Many of the clearly artificial components of the salad dressing, like Xanthan Gum, and such are derived from the corn plant.  The chicken nuggets use binders, emulsifiers and the breaded coating are predominantly derived from corn-based products.  The cheeseburger is rather surprising, but the beef is most likely corn fed, and the cheese and bun probably have significant corn-based ingredients as well.  The french fries get most of their corn content from the oil they are fried in. Considering that human beings are omnivores, that’s a disturbingly high proportion of our diet that is derived from a single plant.

The second section of the book focuses on a small alternative agriculture farm in Virigina, while taking a brief look at the gigantic organic industrial farming system that has arisen.  The Polyface farm is beyond organic in many ways.  Unfortunately, the holistic farming practices used by the Salatin family do not scale to fit the larger industrial farms in many ways.

The look at Salatin’s Polyface farm, which features a nearly closed cycle of great biodiversity contrasts greatly with that of the corporate-based monocultural systems of corn, beef, pork and poultry seen in the first section.  Where Salatin’s farm recycles the waste from the livestock, and uses it to enrich the environment of his farm and the livestock and land therein—the waste from the industrial concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) becomes highly toxic environmental waste that serves no good purpose and can destroy surrounding environments if released as seen in this recent news story.

Polyface farms uses a more natural approach that is clearly sustainable over the long term.  The vast additions of artificial fertilizers, antibiotics, pesticides and other chemicals required by the industrialized large-scale monoculture farms and CAFOs is not required.  Salatin’s approach to farming is clearly far better for the environment, and requires far less energy—in the form of fossil fuels, which are used in the production of most of the chemicals used in industrial agriculture—to sustain it. The only real input to his farm is some additional grain for use as chicken feed.  Much of what would become toxic waste on a CAFO is recycled instead—Polyface farm has no need of a toxic manure waste lagoon.

Pollan also examines the quality of the food coming from the both the predominantly corn-based industrial food supply and the alternative, more environmentally friendly agricultural systems.  The comparisons of food that is produced by the modern industrial agribusiness—cattle being fed food they were not evolved to eat along with antibiotics and artificial growth hormones, and plants that are being raised using fertilizers and pesticides—and that of food being produced by alternative, more “organic” farming methods is eye-opening.  A carrot is clearly not a carrot.  How they are grown and where has drastic effects on the nutrition the food can provide.

I’ll report back when I’ve finished the book.  Serious food for thought about food in the book thus far though.

I originally wrote the following post for the International Telstar Owners Association Forum.  I’ve decided to re-publish it here as well, since many of the visitors to my blog are interested in the Telstar 28.

*********************************************************

The Telstar 28 was introduced in late 2003. Since the boat was introduced, it has had some changes to the design as it has evolved.

The original boats had a centerboard with a draft of 4′ 3″. It was offered in two models, a base version that was essentially the hull and mast, but didn’t include the mast-raising system or much in the way of an interior, outboard or electrical system. The deluxe model had a factory finished interior with the head, galley, and nav console with the basic electrical system, and the 20 HP outboard. IIRC, the mast-raising system was an option. Other options included the bimini, the dodger, laminate sails and a larger 50 HP outboard.

When I ordered my boat, back in late 2006, I had spoken with Will and Tony at length, and asked that some modifications to the design be made. These modifications included adding bow chocks to the bow to improve line-handling, rather than just having a single cleat. There were other modifications I had asked about as well. Originally, I was supposed to get a hull in the 320s.

Due to the requests I had made, and which Tony had seen worthwhile to adding to the production version of the Telstar, I ended up with hull #334, which is my Pretty Gee. She came with a few options that were being tested at the time, like shore power and a refrigerator. I believe she was the first customer boat to have both shorepower and a refrigerator factory installed.

Another option that has been offered off and on is a tall rig for the Telstar. The standard mast is 35′ 6″ tall from the mast step to the mast crane. I believe the tall rig is either 37′ tall. The boom is also about six inches lower on the tall rig boats. This gives the tall rig boats an additional 2′ of sail area. As far as I know, all of the rigging except the backstay is the same as on the standard rig boat, so the genoa is the same size on either boat.

Since my boat, the factory has changed the molds to include a dam in the hull liner for the shower/head area, so that the head can be converted into a shower more easily. This is still a work in progress. There is also a curtain that closes off the forepeak in the more recent boats, and the interior liner of the head has been changed to make it more suitable for using the compartment as a shower.

Another major change is the centerboard. The latest boats have a centerboard that is 9″ longer than the original design, with a draft of 5′. This is supposed to help the boat point better and resist leeway better. Personally, I haven’t had a problem with leeway or pointing on my boat as far as I’ve seen.

The ama intermediate boxes were also changed to allow the side decks that fold down when the amas are retracted drop more vertically than on the original design. This cleans up the appearance of the boat a bit when the boat has the amas folded. From what I understand, it was a cosmetic change, but the boxes differ enough from the ones on the older boats that they are no longer interchangeable.

The amas also no longer have the holes for the lifeline stanchions, which appear to have been a big source of ama leaks. I am using one of the stanchion holes for the solar panel mounts on the Pretty Gee, but generally never bother with mounting the lifelines or stanchions.

The cockpit drains on the original Telstar 28 consisted of two round drains, one mid-cockpit on the port side below the engine throttle control, another in the starboard aft corner. The only problem with this is that the Telstar leans a bit to port, which means that there was usually a small amount of water standing in the cockpit. The later models have a wide slot like drain along the transom that drains out onto the rear swim platform. This seems to work a good deal better. On the Pretty Gee, I’ve added a drain in the port-side of the transom, to clear the standing water out.

The boom and forestay on the later boats have had extension links added to them to make lowering the rig simpler. The forestay extension link allows you to move the furler up towards the top of the mast, so that when the mast is down, the furler is better supported by the mast, with the furling drum just below the mast foot. On the older design without the extension link, you have to detach the forestay/furler foil and move it back up the mast to support the furling drum. The boom extension link allows you to keep the boom and mainsail attached when lowering the mast.

The cabin interior has evolved a bit as well. The older boats didn’t have the cushions that go against the forward ama hinge point at the front of the cabin settees. The small cabinets and interior liner that make up the aft bulkhead of the cabin have been added since my boat was built, as have the two stainless steel hand rails by the partial bulkheads at the forward end of the galley and nav station.

The refrigerator option on the Telstar has gone through several changes as well. Originally, it was an Engel M27, which was mounted outboard of the stove. Then it was a drawer type refrigerator that was mounted below the companionway steps. The most recent boats have gone back to the Engel M27 top-loading refrigerator, but it has been moved to the port side of the companionway, with a slightly narrower companionway ladder. I like the Engel units. They are fairly quiet, and very energy efficient. They are also very highly rated by Practical Sailor magazine.

Even the mast raising system has changed a bit on the newer boats. On my boat, one of the A-frames is mounted to a set of tracks. I don’t believe the newer boats have the tracks on the cabin top any longer. I am considering using the tracks for sheeting a storm jib. It would give me very tight, in-board sheeting and help the boat point better. I have to ask Tony if the tracks are strong enough for that purpose.

The Telstar 28 is a relatively young design, only about five years old. As such, it is still evolving, being tweaked by Tony, often with feedback from the owners of the earlier boats. I don’t think there are two Telstar 28s made that are identical, as Tony has been constantly tweaking the design.

Overall, I am very happy with my choice to get a Telstar 28, as I’ve written on my blog. If you’re looking for a versatile, fun boat, that can work as a trailerable daysailer, but is capable of longer cruises, then this might be a good choice for you.

One thing that I’d highly recommend for all cruising sailboats is upgrading to LED-based lights. This is for two reasons. The first is that upgrading to LED lights can reduce the electrical load on a cruising sailboat significantly. The second is that LED-based lights are lower maintenance and lower cost over the long run. You can now get LED replacement lights for both cabin and navigation lights.

Navigation lights

However, there are some caveats to going with LED-based navigation lights. I would recommend only going with ones that have met USCG certification. The reason for this is simple—if you are involved in a collision, having lights that were not USCG-certified may open you up to additional liability.

On most boats, 25-65′ LOA, the least expensive way to get LED-based navigation lights is to purchase AquaSignal Series 25 or 40 navigation light fixtures and then replace the bulbs with the LED-replacement bulbs made by DR. LED. The DR. LED/AquaSignal fixture combinations have been USCG certified. I am using the Dr. LED replacement bulbs on the the deck level bicolor and stern light, since they are AquaSignal 25 fixtures. I am also going to replace the steaming light with one as well.

EDIT: I recently found out that the only USCG-certified Dr. LED fixture/replacement bulb combination is their Polarstar 40 with the AquaSignal Series 40 anchor light. The rest are not USCG certified. In their place, I’d recommend using the AquaSignal Series 32 LED fixtures, which are certified. Be aware that many other LED fixtures, including some of the other AquaSignal model lines, are not USCG-certified.

You can also go with the purpose built fixtures, by Orca Green Marine, Lopo Lights, or several other manufacturers, but I’ve found that these are generally far more expensive than going with the AquaSignal/DR. LED combination. I have the Orca Green Marine Tri-Anchor/Strobe masthead light fixture on my boat, shown below—but the DR. LED/AquaSignal combination wasn’t available when I was fitting her out.

[img]http://www.orcagreen.com/Prod_TriAnchor.jpg[/img]

Cabin Lights

Of the replacement bulbs for cabin lights, the best are probably the SensiBulb brand LED-replacement bulbs. They can be retrofitted to many different light fixtures, including those that use halogen MR-10 or dual contact bayonet bulbs. While the SensiBulb brand are slightly more expensive than some of the other brands, the quality and color of the light they provide is well worth it in my opinion.

[img]http://www.sailorssolutions.com/ProductImages/SEN10W_1.jpg[/img]

Why Use LED-based Lights

The fact that LED-based lights can use up to 80% less power than their incandescent counterparts means that you can often go longer without re-charging the batteries. This can make a significant difference on a longer cruise. It means that you put less wear on the engine for battery charging. You can often get by with a smaller house bank.

Many boats can cruise and re-charge their batteries using purely passive means, either solar or wind, or a combination of the two, when equipped with LED-based lights. This conserves fuel and allows them to be more self-sufficient, which means lower costs cruising in the long run.

The lower maintenance aspect of LED-based lights is something worth noting as well. It means that you’re less likely to need to go up the mast to replace a blown light bulb. It means you can get away with carrying fewer spares.

Over on one of the sailing forums I participate in, there was a question about how to setup the bilge pumps on a boat.  Here are my thoughts on that issue.

Ideally, the a monohull sailboat should have at least four bilge pumps.  Two would be electric, and two would be manual.

The two manual pumps are the largest, highest capacity manual diaphragm pumps that money can buy.  One would be mounted so it can be operated by a person in the cockpit, and one mounted where it can be operated by someone in the cabin.  Ideally, both would be close enough to the companionway that they could be operated from both inside or outside the cabin.  These are the pumps that are used to assist the electric bilge pumps or in the case that the electric pumps fail.

The third pump would be a fairly small, low capacity electric bilge pump that is used for bilge maintenance.  It has an integrated float switch and is wired directly to the house batteries with a switch that has off, on and automatic positions.  It should also have a bilge pump counter, that keeps track of how many times the pump activates.

The reason I call this a “bilge maintenance pump” is that its primary purpose is to maintain a relatively dry bilge.  It is sized and designed to take care of the routine amount of water that leaks into the bilge via the stuffing box, the mast (in the case of keel-stepped masts), condensation, the air conditioning and other such water sources.

As part of your routine when closing up the boat, the captain would note the number on the bilge pump counter in the ship’s log book.  When opening the boat back up, they’d compare the counter to the last number recorded.  If they divided the difference between the two numbers by the number of days they were away from the boat, they’d have a rough daily average for the maintenance pump.  If that daily average number starts to increase significantly, it is time to look for a leak.

The fourth pump would be a very high capacity electric bilge pump that is also wired directly to the house batteries. It has a float switch mounted about two inches above the third pump’s float switch.  This is the main electric dewatering pump for the boat.  It should also have a switch that has on, off, and automatic positiions.  It should also be connected to a very loud high water alarm, preferably that sounds in the cockpit.

The reason this fourth pump has an alarm is to alert people at the marina that there is a problem with the boat, and that action needs to be taken.  Ideally, they should contact the owner if this alarm sounds.  The boat should have owner contact information posted somewhere in the cockpit that is easily located in the case someone boards the boat to see what the alarm is about.  This is especially true if the boat is on a mooring.

The setup differs a bit for a trimaran, since a trimaran has three hulls to consider, and the bilge in the main hull is generally far shallower than that of a monohull sailboat.  However, the fact that most multihulls won’t sink readily if only one hull is flooded is another consideration.  There should be at least one bilge pump in each ama, and at least one in the main hull.

The bilge pumps in the amas should be manual, since the amas should, ideally, be water-tight and only pumped out after being inspected. Currently, I’ve been using a navy-style piston pump to dewater the amas, but not much water gets in to them, so it isn’t much of a big deal.  I do plan on installing a manual diaphragm pump, to allow me to pump out the main center section of each ama, which seems to get the most water due to the large hatch on it.

I also plan on installing a three bilge pumps in the main hull.  A small maintenance pump,  a large electric pump and a large manual pump as described above.

The average passenger car requires about 25 horsepower for 90% of its operation.  The only time more horsepower is really needed is when the vehicle is accelerating. Unfortunately, current automotive technology has to design the engine for the 10% requirement of relatively high-horsepower, rather than the 90%—leaving the engine running fairly inefficiently 90% of the time.

Current hybrids avoid this by using an electric motor to power the vehicle, and then running a small gasoline engine to provide additional horsepower on a demand basis as well as generate electricity to re-charge the battery pack for the electric motor. However, this isn’t all that efficient an approach either, since even the most modern battery technology is relatively heavy—adding significant weight to the vehicle—and relatively inefficient.

The sad part is that almost 40 years ago a solution was developed that addressed the two major shortcomings of the modern automobile—fuel efficiency and exhaust emissions. Detroit was offered this technology in various forms over the last 40 years, and has consistently refused to even look at it or consider using it, most recently as two years ago. This is one major reason I think Congress should let the auto industry fail—they’ve brought it upon themselves.

The technology in question would allow a full-size passenger vehicle—a sedan capable of carrying five adult passengers—to operate with considerably lower emissions and better fuel efficiency than most cars are capable of today.  It would do so without creating toxic hazardous waste in the form of large battery banks as is currently the case with the gasoline-electric hybrids, like the Toyota Prius.

As a coincidence, some of the technology that was touted by Toyota in an magazine ad series a few years back was actually developed for this project almost forty years ago.  Toyota had run a series of ads claiming to be the first dual power supply transmission design.  They really should have done better research, as that occurred almost forty years ago. When the inventor of the next generation automotive power plant contacted Toyota and informed them of this, the ad campaign quietly disappeared.

If you’re curious about the Next Generation Automobile that was developed almost forty years ago, drop me an e-mail or leave a comment on this blog.

That’s a good question.  My feeling on it is that we shouldn’t bail them out.  Chrysler has already gone to the government for assistance once before, yet here they are again. I think we should let the three automakers sink or swim on their own.  Bailing them out is more than likely just postponing the inevitable.

Unlike most Americans, I have seen letters from the big three automakers that state they weren’t interested in developing a more fuel-efficient, ultra low-emissions automobile.  They didn’t even want to explore the possibility. That shows you how disconnected from reality the management of the three big automakers really are.

Chrysler is an example of bad management through several changes of ownership, with each learning nothing from the mistakes of their predecessors.  At one point, following the last government bailout of Chrysler, most of their product line was based on the Aries K-car platform—including their new innovation, the minivan.  However, since those dark days, Chrysler has not really learned much.  Why else would a car company come out with a vehicle like the Dodge Viper.  The Dodge Viper is a perfect example of how wasteful and inefficient a car can be.  It has a V10 engine and only seats two people.  Is there really any need for any automobile to have that much horsepower or capability for speed, given a top speed limit of 70 mph in this country?

General Motors went and developed and sold the Hummer brand of SUVs.  The H2 is a monstrosity that really has no good reason for existing.  It doesn’t even share any real heritage of the military Humvee the brand was supposed to be based on, being a fairly standard SUV—essentially a re-badged Chevy Suburban for the most part.  The original Hummer, or the H1 as it is sometimes called, has a very unique drivetrain and was developed for all-terrain conditions, not highway and road use.  Even the H1 really serves little purpose as a consumer vehicle.

Ford really isn’t much better.  Now, I will disclose that my favorite aunt was a long-time Ford executive, and was, at least until she retired, referred to within the family as Auntie Ford. However, Ford developed the Excursion, which was even larger and more massive than the Hummer H2.  There was no need or excuse for such a large vehicle.  Ford’s current product line is far better suited to the needs of the economy and the environment—especially as the Excursion has been discontinued.

The Dodge Viper, the Hummer H2, and the Ford Excursion are all fairly expensive, low fuel economy, limited niche marketplace vehicles.  Wouldn’t it make far more sense to design and build a vehicle that had a much wider market appeal, was more affordable, and was more fuel efficient.  They would make less per vehicle, but I’m pretty sure they’d sell a lot more vehicles.

Poor planning and management has gotten the three automakers to the point their at today.  Their management has profited, even in years where the companies lost huge amounts of money.  There is no obligation for the US Taxpayer to bail them out.  By letting the market deal with them, we will end up with automobile manufacturers who are far more fit and responsive to the changing needs of the automotive marketplace.

George W. Bush’s plan to tap the TARP fund to bail out the big Three is short-sighted and irresponsible. It doesn’t matter where the money goes, it is throwing good money after bad. Letting the auto industry sink or swim on its own is the only way to get the UAW and the management of the big three automakers to accept a changed reality of the auto industry. Honda, Toyota, et al, all have factories in the USA now. Building cars that are fuel efficient is something that should have been done decades ago.

If GWB doesn’t understand that bailing out Detroit is something that has no guarantee of success, and that the money is better spent elsewhere, unless the big Three and the UAW are willing to come to terms with the reality of the automotive marketplace. Until then there’s no point in spending the money there.

When the Hyundai Excel was first introduced in the US market many years ago, people laughed at it… it had a rather ugly design and some reliability issues…. yet twenty years later, Hyundai was the first automaker to come out with a 10 year warranty, and they’re doing a hell of a lot better than the big three.

The Telstar 28 was introduced in late 2003. Since the boat was introduced, it has had some changes to the design as it has evolved.

The original boats had a centerboard with a draft of 4′ 3″. It was offered in two models, a base version that was essentially the hull and mast, but didn’t include the mast-raising system or much in the way of an interior, outboard or electrical system.

The deluxe model had a factory finished interior with the head, galley, and nav console with the basic electrical system, and the 20 HP outboard. IIRC, the mast-raising system was an option. Other options included the bimini, the dodger, laminate sails, an autopilot, instruments, a screacher or asymmetric spinnaker, and a larger 50 HP outboard.

Since then, Performance Cruising has dropped the basic model, which I don’t believe ever sold, and changed what the basic boat includes.  The mast raising system, which I also believe was on almost every boat except for a few prototypes, is now standard—which is a good thing, cause it rocks. 

When I ordered my boat, back in late 2006, I had spoken with Will and Tony at length, and asked that some modifications to the design be made. These modifications included adding bow chocks to the bow to improve line-handling, rather than just having a single cleat. There were other modifications I had asked about as well. Originally, I was supposed to get a hull in the 320s.

Due to the requests I had made, and which Tony had seen worthwhile to adding to the production version of the Telstar, I ended up with hull #334, which is my Pretty Gee. She came with a few options that were being tested at the time, like shore power and a refrigerator. I believe she was the first customer boat to have both shorepower and a refrigerator factory installed.

Another option that has been offered off and on is a tall rig for the Telstar. The standard mast is 35′ 6″ tall from the mast step to the mast crane. I believe the tall rig is either 37′ tall. The boom is also about six inches lower on the tall rig boats. This gives the tall rig boats an additional 2′ of sail area. As far as I know, all of the rigging except the backstay is the same as on the standard rig boat, so the genoa is the same size on either boat.

Since my boat, the factory has changed the molds to include a dam in the hull liner for the shower/head area, so that the head can be converted into a shower more easily. This is still a work in progress. There is also a curtain that closes off the forepeak in the more recent boats, and the interior liner of the head has been changed to make it more suitable for using the compartment as a shower.

Another major change is the centerboard. The latest boats have a centerboard that is 9″ longer than the original design, with a draft of 5′. This is supposed to help the boat point better and resist leeway better. Personally, I haven’t had a problem with leeway or pointing on my boat as far as I’ve seen.

The ama intermediate boxes were also changed to allow the side decks that fold down when the amas are retracted drop more vertically than on the original design. This cleans up the appearance of the boat a bit when the boat has the amas folded. From what I understand, it was a cosmetic change, but the boxes differ enough from the ones on the older boats that they are no longer interchangeable.

The amas also no longer have the holes for the lifeline stanchions, which appear to have been a big source of ama leaks. I am using one of the stanchion holes for the solar panel mounts on the Pretty Gee, but generally never bother with mounting the lifelines or stanchions.

The cockpit drains on the original Telstar 28 consisted of two round drains, one mid-cockpit on the port side below the engine throttle control, another in the starboard aft corner. The only problem with this is that the Telstar leans a bit to port, which means that there was usually a small amount of water standing in the cockpit. The later models have a wide slot like drain along the transom that drains out onto the rear swim platform. This seems to work a good deal better. On the Pretty Gee, I’ve added a drain in the port-side of the transom, to clear the standing water out.

The boom and forestay on the later boats have had extension links added to them to make lowering the rig simpler. The forestay extension link allows you to move the furler up towards the top of the mast, so that when the mast is down, the furler is better supported by the mast, with the furling drum just below the mast foot. On the older design without the extension link, you have to detach the forestay/furler foil and move it back up the mast to support the furling drum. The boom extension link allows you to keep the boom and mainsail attached when lowering the mast.

The cabin interior has evolved a bit as well. The older boats didn’t have the cushions that go against the forward ama hinge point at the front of the cabin settees. The small cabinets and interior liner that make up the aft bulkhead of the cabin have been added since my boat was built, as have the two stainless steel hand rails by the partial bulkheads at the forward end of the galley and nav station.

The refrigerator option on the Telstar has gone through several changes as well. Originally, it was an Engel M27, which was mounted outboard of the stove. Then it was a drawer type refrigerator that was mounted below the companionway steps. The most recent boats have gone back to the Engel M27 top-loading refrigerator, but it has been moved to the port side of the companionway, with a slightly narrower companionway ladder. I think the latest location makes the most sense, since it keeps the refrigerator easily accessible, even if the stove is being used, and keeps the weight down low and close to the centerline of the boat. I like the Engel units. They are fairly quiet, and very energy efficient. They are also very highly rated by Practical Sailor magazine.

Even the mast raising system has changed a bit on the newer boats. On my boat, one of the A-frames is mounted to a set of tracks. I don’t believe the newer boats have the tracks on the cabin top any longer. I am considering using the tracks for sheeting a storm jib. It would give me very tight, in-board sheeting and help the boat point better. I have to ask Tony if the tracks are strong enough for that purpose.

The Telstar 28 is a relatively young design, only about five years old. As such, it is still evolving, being tweaked by Tony, often with feedback from the owners of the earlier boats. I don’t think there are two Telstar 28s made that are identical, as Tony has been constantly tweaking the design.

One modification I had spoken to Will and Tony about at length was building the Telstar 28 with a bridgedeck.  I have since added one to the Pretty Gee.

Overall, I am very happy with my choice to get a Telstar 28, as I’ve written on my blog. If you’re looking for a versatile, fun boat, that can work as a trailerable daysailer, but is capable of longer cruises, then this might be a good choice for you.

Happy Anniversary Gee… I miss you still.

Today is Election Day 2008, and would have been our eighth anniversary. Almost eight years ago, Gee and I walked to the local elementary school and cast our votes in the 2000 election. This morning, I did much the same thing, but at a different elementary school. It is pretty strange to think that it has been eight years since Gee and I got married. Especially, if you realize that she’s been gone for over seven of those eight years.

I hope everyone got out and voted today.

Got a message from a friend of mine that he was going to be stuck at Logan Airport for a couple hours and asked if I could meet him and have coffee at the airport. Since I wasn’t that far from the airport and could take the time off, I decided to head over there.

Craig, a fellow sailor, was waiting for his flight to the 52nd state, as we generally refer to Canada. He was headed up there for work. We met at the Au Bon Pain, which is a coffee shop/bakery chain pretty common on the east coast.

Last time I saw Craig was on my trip down to Maryland and Virginia three weeks ago. He was one of the people that came by Chuck and Mary’s house and went to the boat show with us. He’s not too bad for a monohull sailor; he has a Sabre 34.

One of Craig’s hobbies is playing various stringed instruments. He’s fairly good, and has some videos posted up on Youtube.com

He’s got a fair collection of stringed instruments as you can see in this photo of his. He had a mandolin and a fiddle with him, as several of his friends in Nova Scotia play, and he was going to be joining them.

Craig's Instrument Collection

There are often people looking to get a bluewater capable boat for a relatively low budget.

James Baldwin, of Atom fame, has posted a list of about sixty boats that are under 33′ which he considers fairly capable and easily modified to be used as bluewater pocket cruisers. I’m pretty impressed with the list, but it is limited to monohulls.

Many of these boats are available for under $30,000, and most are proven passagemakers. If you don’t require a 40′+ monster and can deal with the limitations of a smaller boat…. your dream boat may be on this list.

You can read the list here.

I’ve also copied the boat names and specifications, but not his entire article here for your consideration. James has commented on most of the boats and listed some of the pluses and minuses of them.

Falmouth Cutter 22 – LOA: 30’6” LOD: 22’ LWL: 20’10” Beam: 8’ Draft: 3’6” Displacement: 7,400 lbs. Ballast: 2,500 lbs encapsulated lead.
More info: The Falmouth Cutter Web Site
http://www.samlmorse.com/?a=fc_home
Cape George Cutters § Falmouth Cutter 22′ § Cecil Lange / William Atkin / traditional full keel sailboat

Bristol 24 – LOD: 24’7” LWL: 18’1” Beam: 8’ Draft: 3’5” Displacement: 5,920 lbs. Ballast: 2,400 lbs? Sail Area: 296 sq. ft.
More info: Bristol Owners’ Association Home Page

Pacific Seacraft Dana 24 – LOA: 27’3” LOD: 24’ LWL: 21’5” Beam: 8’7” Draft: 3’10” Displacement: 8,000 lbs. Ballast: 3,200 lbs. internal lead.

Bayfield 25 – LOD: 25’ LWL: 19′8″ Beam: 8′ Displacement: 4,300 lbs Draft: 2′11″ Ballast: 1,500 lbs.

Cape Dory 25 – LOD: 24’10” LWL: 18’ Beam: 7’3” Draft: 3’ Displacement: 4,000 lbs. Ballast: 1,700 lbs. Sail area: 264 sq. ft.

Cape Dory 25D – LOD: 25’ LWL: 19’ Beam: 8’ Draft: 3’6” Displacement: 5,120 lbs. Ballast: 2,050 lbs.

Pacific Seacraft 25 – LOA: 26’3”? LOD: 25’ LWL: 21’ Beam: 8’ Draft: 3’4” Displacement: 5,700 lbs. or 4,750? Ballast: 1,300 or 1,750? internal lead.

Rhodes Meridian 25 – LOA: 24’9” LWL: 17’6” Beam: 7’ to 7’3” Draft: 3’3” to 3’7” Displacement: 5,000 lbs. Ballast: 2,750 lbs.
More info: Meridian

Contessa 26 / Taylor 26 – LOD: 25’6” LWL: 21’ Beam: 7’6” Draft: 4’ Displacement: 5,400 lbs. Ballast:

Cape Dory 26 – LOD: 25’11” LWL: 19’3” Beam: 8’ Draft: 3’7” Displacement: 5,300 lbs. Ballast: 2,400 lbs. Sail area: 304 sq. ft.

Cheoy Lee Offshore 26 – LOD: 25’7” LWL: 20’11” Beam: 8’10” Draft: 3’9” Displacement: 6,100 lbs. Ballast: 2,240 lbs.
More info: Offshore 26

International Folkboat 26 – LOD: 25’8” LWL: 19’7” Beam: 7’5” Draft: 4’ Displacement: approx. 5,000 lbs. Ballast: 2,750 lbs.

Kaiser 26 – LOA: 27’6” LOD: 26’ LWL: Beam: 7’10” Draft: 4’ Displacement: 6,200 lbs. Ballast: 2,700 lbs.

Morris Frances 26 – LOD: 26’ LWL: 21’3” Beam: 8’ to 8’2” Draft: 3’10” Displacement: 6,800 lbs. Ballast: 3,500 lbs. (external or encapsulated lead)
More info: Sailboat – Frances 26 by Morris Yachts and Victoria Yachts designed by Chuck Paine

Pearson Ariel 26 – LOD: 25’7” LWL: 18’8” Beam: 8’ Draft: 3’8” Displacement: 5,120 lbs. Ballast: 2,300 lbs. lead.
More info: Ariel Home Page

Westerly Centaur 26 – LOD: 26’ LWL: 21’4” Beam: 8’5” Draft: 3’ Displacement: 5,500 lbs. Ballast: cast iron.
More info: SCA – THE TRUTH ABOUT TWINS
BoatUS.com: Boat Reviews by Jack Hornor, N.A. – Westerly Centaur 26

Albin Vega 27 – LOD: 27’1” LWL: 23’2” Beam: 8’1” Draft: 3’10” Displacement: 5,070 lbs. Ballast: 2,020 lbs.
More info: The Albin Vega

Bristol 27 – LOD: 27’2” LWL: 19’9” Beam: 8’ Draft: 4’ Displacement: 6,600 lbs. Ballast: 2,575 lbs. internal lead.
More info: Bristol Owners’ Association Home Page
Sailing Magazine

Cape Dory 27 – LOD: 27’1” LWL: 20’ Beam: 8’6” Draft: 4’ Displacement: 7,500 lbs. Ballast: 3,000 lbs. Sail area: 365 sq. ft. General Comments: Alberg design. 227 built between 1976-84. More info: CDSOA, Inc. — CD27

Cheoy Lee Newell Cadet / Offshore 27 – LOD: 26’10” LWL: 19’6” Beam: 7’8” Draft: 4’4” Displacement: 6,900 lbs. Ballast: 2,700 lbs. (iron in cement) General Comments: At least two versions were built in the 1960’s at the Honk Kong yard. Minuses: Teak decks from the 1960’s are a maintenance problem. More info: Cheoy Lee Cadets

Dockrell 27 – LOD: 27’ LWL: 21’ Beam: 8’ Draft: 3’ Displacement: 7,000 lbs. Ballast: 3,200 lbs. long iron wing keel.
More info: Dockrell 27 cutter archive details – Yachtsnet Ltd. online UK yacht brokers – yacht brokerage and boat sales

Pacific Seacraft Orion 27 – LOA: 30’ LOD: 27’ LWL: 22’2” Beam: 9’3” Draft: 4’ Displacement: 10,000 lbs. Ballast: 3,800 lbs.

Nor’Sea 27 – LOA: 31’ LOD: 27’ LWL: 25’ Beam: 8’ Draft: 3’10” Displacement: 8,100 lbs. Ballast: 3,100 lbs.
More info: Nor’Sea 27
Sailing Magazine

Sea Sprite 27/28 – LOD: 27’11” LWL: 20’ Beam: 8’10” Draft: 4’3” Displacement: 7,600 lbs. Ballast: 3,600 lbs.
More info: Sea Sprites: Home

Tartan 27 – LOD: 27’ LWL: 21’4” Beam: 8’8” Draft: 3’2” with board up, 6’4” board down. Displacement: 7,400 lbs. Ballast: 2,400 lbs.
More info: Welcome to the Tartan Owners website

Vancouver 27/28 – LOD: 27’ LWL: 22’11” Beam: 8’8” Draft: 4’3” Displacement: 8,800 – 8,960 lbs. Ballast: 3,500 lbs.
More info: Boats.com – Boat Review/Test: Pocket Voyager

Bristol Channel Cutter 28 – LOA: 37’9” LOD: 28’1” LWL: 26’3” Beam: 10’1” Draft: 4’10” Displacement: 14,000 lbs. Ballast: 4,600 lbs.
More info: Boats.com – News: Hess’s Bristol Channel Cutter
Cape George Cutters § Bristol Channel Cutter 28′ § Cecil Lange / William Atkin / traditional full keel sailboat

Cape Dory 28 – LOD: 28’1” LWL: 22’2” Beam: 8’10” Draft: 4’ Displacement: 9,000 lbs. Ballast: 3,500 lbs. Sail area: 404 sq. ft.
More info: CDSOA, Inc. — CD28

Cheoy Lee Offshore 28 – LOA: 28’ LWL: 22’ Beam: 9’2” Draft: 3’6” with centerboard up. Displacement: 8,000 lbs. Ballast: ?

Great Dane 28 – LOA: 28’ LWL: ? Beam: ? Draft: ? Displacement: ? Ballast: ?

L. Francis Herreshoff H-28 – LOA: 29’6” LWL: 23’ Beam: 8’10” Draft: 3’11” Displacement: 7,300 lbs. Ballast: 3,950 lbs.
More info: Compass Yachts

Liberty Yachts Custom 28 – LOD: 28’ LWL: 24’ Beam: 9’6” Draft: 4’ Displacement: 12,000 lbs. Ballast: 5,000 lbs.

Morris Linda 28 – LOA: 28’1” LWL: 23’4” Beam: 9’2” Draft: 4’4” Displacement: 8,300 lbs. Ballast: 3,900 lbs lead.

Pearson Triton 28 – LOD: 28’6” LWL: 20’6” Beam: 8’3” Draft: 4’ (later models 4’3”) Displacement: approx. 8,000 lbs. Ballast: 3,019 lbs. (early models before hull #383 external lead, later models internal lead.)
More info: New England Triton Association

Rhodes Ranger 28 – LOA: 28’6″ LWL: 20′ Beam: 8′ Draft: 3’10” Displacement: ? Ballast: reported as 1,900 lbs. external iron or 2,750 lbs. lead.
More info: Philip Rhodes Sail Boats
http://astro.temple.edu/~bstavis/pr/ranger-accomodations.jpg

Shannon 28 – LOD: 28’2” LWL: 22’11”’ Beam: 9’6” Draft: 4’3” Displacement: 9,300 lbs. Ballast: 3,600 lbs. lead.

Southern Cross 28 – LOA: 30’5” LOD: 28’ LWL: 20’2” Beam: 8’6” Draft: 4’8” Displacement: 8,500 lbs. Ballast: 3,400 lbs.
More info: member info

Taipan 28 – LOA: 28’ LWL: about 22’ Beam: about 8’ Draft: 4’6” Displacement: 7,850 lbs. Ballast: 3,085 lbs. More info: Atom Voyages | Islander Taipan 28 Refit Photos

Westsail 28 – LOD: 28’ LWL: 25’ Beam: 9’7” Draft: 4’4” Displacement: 13,500 lbs. Ballast: 4,200 lbs.
More info: WOA Web Site

Alberg 29 – LOD: 29′3″ LWL: 22′3″ Beam: 9′2″ Draft: 4′7″ Displacement: 9,000 lbs. Ballast: 4,000 lbs. Sail area: 416 sq. ft.
More info: Twentynine » An Alberg 29 Site

Bayfield 29 – LOA: 29’ LOD: about 27’6” LWL: 21’9” Beam: 10’2” Draft: 3’6” Displacement: 7,100 lbs. Ballast: 3,000 lbs.
More info: Bayfield 29 – Used Sailboat Market in Canada

Bristol 29 – LOD: 29’2” LWL: 22’8” Beam: 9’2” Draft: 4’6” Displacement: 8,400 lbs. Ballast: 3,350 lbs. internal lead. Sail area: 402 sq. ft.
More info: Bristol Owners’ Association Home Page

Islander 29 – LOA: 29′ LWL: 20′4″ Beam: 8′11″‘ Draft: 3′8″ Displacement: 8,100 lbs. Ballast: ?

Westerly Konsort 29 – LOA: LOD: 28’10” LWL: 25’7” Beam: 10’9” Draft: 3’3” Displacement: 9,211 lbs. Ballast:

Alberg 30 – LOA: 30’3” LOD: 30’3” LWL: Beam: 8’9” Draft: 4’3” Displacement: 9,000 lbs. Ballast: 3,300 lbs. (encapsulated cast iron) Sail area: 410 sq. ft.
More info: The Alberg 30 Site
Sailing Magazine

Allied Seawind Ketch 30 – LOA: 30’6” LWL: 24’ Beam: 9’3” Draft: 4’3” Displacement: 12,080 lbs. Ballast: Sail area: 500 sq. ft.

Bristol 30 – LOA: 30’ LWL: 22’8” Beam: 9’2” Draft: 4’6” std. keel. (centerboard version 3’4”) Displacement: 8,400 lbs. Ballast: 3,450 lbs. (internal lead) Sail area: 402 sq. ft.
More info: Bristol Owners’ Association Home Page

Cal 30 – LOA: 30′ LWL: ? Beam: 10′ Draft: 4′11″ Displacement: ? Ballast: ?

Cape Dory 30 – LOA: 30 2″ LWL: 22′10″ Beam: 9′ Draft: 4′2″ Displacement: 10,000 lbs. Ballast: 4,000 lbs. Sail area: 437 sq. ft. cutter.
More info: CDSOA, Inc. — CD30

Cheoy Lee Bermuda 30 – LOA: 29′7″ LWL: 24′ Beam: 8′9″ Draft: 3′8″ Displacement: 10,100 lbs. Ballast: Sail Area: 343 sq. ft. General Comments: Available as ketch or sloop. Built in Hong Kong from 1962-67 in wood and fiberglass. Minuses: Lots of wood to maintain even on the fiberglass version. More info:
Cheoy Lee Bermudas

Cheoy Lee Luders 30 – LOA: 29′10″ LWL: 22′ Beam: 9′1″ Draft: 4′9″ Displacement: 9,900 lbs. Ballast: 3,750 lbs. Sail area: 425 sq. ft.
More info: Luders 30 – Cheoy Lee

Rawson 30 – LOA: 32′6″ LOD: 30′6″ LWL: 22′ Beam: 9′ Draft: 5′ Displacement: 12,500 lbs. Ballast: 5,000 lbs. Sail area: 565 sq.ft. General Comments: William Garden design.

Cape George 31 – LOA: 36′ LOD: 31′ LWL: 27′6″ Beam: 9′6″ Draft: 4′6″ Displacement: 15,835 lbs. Ballast: 7,200 lbs. internal lead.
More info: Cape George Cutters § History § Cecil Lange / William Atkin / traditional full keel sailboat

Cheoy Lee Offshore 31 – LOA: 30′9″ LWL: 23′4″ Beam: 8′10″ Draft: 3′10″ Displacement: 10,750 lbs. Ballast: 4,000 lbs. Sail area: 424 sq. ft.
More info: Offshore 31

Nicholson 31 – LOA: 31’7” LWL: 24’2” Beam: 10’3” Draft: 5’ Displacement: 14,750 lbs. Ballast: 5,300 lbs. Sail area: 500 sq. ft.
More info: Atom Voyages | Nicholson 31 Refit

Pacific Seacraft 31 – LOA: 31’10” LOD: 30’6” LWL: 24’2” Beam: 9’10” Draft: 4’/4’11” shoal option/standard full keel. Displacement: 11,000 lb. Ballast: 4,4000 lb. external lead. Sail area: 485 sq. ft. sloop, 600 cuter.
More info: Boats.com – Boat Review/Test: Cruising Expert
Pacific Seacraft : PS 31

Pacific Seacraft Mariah 31 – LOA: 36’ LOD: 31’ LWL: 25’ Beam: 10’9” Draft: 4’6” Displacement: 16,000 lb. Ballast: 6,000 lb. Sail area: 596 sq. ft.
More info: Mariah31 : Messages : 120-150 of 150

Southern Cross 31 – LOA: 34’6” LOD: 31’ LWL: 25’ Beam: 9’6” Draft: 4’6” Displacement: 13,600 lb. Ballast: 4,400 lb. internal lead.
More info: SCOA Home Page

Contessa 32 – LOD: 32’ LWL: 24’ Beam: 9’6” Draft: 5’6” Displacement: 9,500 lbs. Ballast: 4,500 lbs. internal lead.
More info: Sailing Magazine

Pearson Vanguard 32 – LOA: 32′6″ LWL: 22′4″ Beam: 9′3″ Draft: 4′6″ Displacement: 10,300 lbs. Ballast: 4,250 lbs. internal lead. Sail area: About 470 sq. ft.
More info: The venerable Pearson Vanguard This grand* old dame will* always be someone
pearson vanguard at pearsonvanguard.org

Rhodes Chesapeake 32 – LOA: 31′9″ LWL: 22′1″ Beam: 8′9″ Draft: 4′9″ Displacement: ? Ballast: 3,750 lbs. external lead. Sail area: 408 sq. ft. working sail and 588 with genoa.
More info: History

Westsail 32 – LOA: About 40′ including bowsprit and boomkin. LOD: 32’ LWL: 27’6” Beam: 11’ Draft: 5’ Displacement: 19,500 Ballast: 7,000 lbs internal (lead/iron on early boats and all lead casting on later models). Sail area: 629 sq. ft.
More info: Westsail 32 – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
WOA Web Site

To this list, I’d add the following boats:

Hallberg Rassy Monsun 31

Elizabethan 29, 30, 31

Golden Hind 31

Today, I’m writing about Courtney, the young daughter of an online friend of mine. She passed away earlier this week, due to complications from her cancer. She was one of the youngest women to be diagnosed with breast cancer , as she was only twenty or so when she was diagnosed.

Today is her memorial service. She was a dancer, and her life has touched many members of the online sailing community that I am a member of. I would ask that you keep her and her family in your prayers and thoughts today.

A few years ago, I first heard this song and thought of how appropriate it was for Gee and I, and think that this video would be appropriate for Courtney and her family now.

Diamond Rio’s One More Day

Right now, my thoughts are with an online friend, Mike, and his family. Mike is a fellow sailor, and I know him through one of the sailing forums I participate on. While I’ve never met Courtney, or her family, I have spoken and corresponded with them over the past year.

His daughter Courtney is a very brave young woman. She is battling metastic breast cancer, and, just this past week, successfully underwent a very dangerous operation to fuse several of her vertebrae together, including the C1 vertebra. These vertebra have been damaged by the cancer and the various treatments she has undergone.

I am hoping that the next round of chemotherapy goes better than the previous round. Courtney reminds me much of Gee, especially in her determination not to let her battle with cancer consume her. She has a great support network in terms of her family and I wish them all the best. If you are reading this, please keep Courtney and her family in your thoughts and prayers.

Courtney—if you get a chance to read this, know that my thoughts and prayers and those of my friends and family are with you and your family. Having been through something similar with Gee and her illness, I sympathize and empathize with you and your family. If there is anything I can do, please let me know. Your father has my cell phone number.

One on of the forums I am on, someone linked to a webcomic, xkcd.com. The webcomic, while not the most well executed, since the main characters are stick figures, is very well done and thought provoking. I’d highly recommend you take a look. The humor is a bit twisted, much like my own, and not politically correct at times. One of my favorites is this one:

How to get surreal feedback on eBay.

Today, I was working at my friend’s company and a strange thing happened.  When she walked in, she asked me to take a look at some photos that were on her cell phone.  On her way into the office, she had passed a sailboat for sale.  She wanted to know what I thought of it.

I took a look at the photos, and the boat was an old O’Day Javelin.  This is a sloop-rigged, 14′ daysailer that was built by O’Day in Fall River, Massachusetts, from 1962 to the mid-1980s, when the company went under.  It was designed by Uffa Fox. I had sailed one of these back when I was a teenager, but hadn’t seen one since then.

She wanted to know if I thought this would be a good boat for her children to learn on, and whether it would be appropriate for the pond that is across the street from their summer home. I thought it would be an excellent choice, since it is sloop-rigged, unlike the Sunfish.  Her two older children have crewed for me aboard my Pretty Gee.

She asked me to come with her to look at the boat, since she wanted my opinion on the price and condition of the boat.  I agreed, so off we went.  The sails were in fair shape from what I could see, and the hull, while needing some cosmetic repairs and a good paint job, was in fair shape.  The trailer was a bit rusty, but otherwise sound.  I thought the price was more than fair, especially, when the owner came down $100 on the price.  She wrote a check and now she owns a nice little daysailer.

I’m hoping she can get the trailer registered and insured this week.  Her son and I will be taking the boat down to the summer place as soon as it is street legal.  I hope we can get it rigged and sailing by sometime next week.

I’ve given her son and older daughter a copy of Dave Seidman’s “The Complete Sailor,” which is one of the finest sailing primers that I’ve ever seen.  I highly recommend it if you’re interested in learning how to sail.  It is well written and has clear illustrations.  Unlike many other “learn to sail” books, this book goes into a much broader area of sailing history, boat development, design, techniques and knowledge, while still being very understandable and a fairly compact book.

More on this later.  It is going to be an interesting summer.

I thought I’d add another name to the vendor black list.

Apparently, Quantum Sails of Newport doesn’t think much of its customers, at least in one case I’ve seen. I was looking at the stack pack on a friend’s boat, and there was a section about three inches long that the stitching had missed going through the canvas and didn’t connect the zipper edge to the canvas there. He had recently taken the stack pack to Quantum Sails Newport to have the entire thing restitched. They did about the shoddiest job of re-stitching it that I’ve ever seen.

He told me, that when he contacted Quantum, they told him to bring it on over. Now, looking at the stack pack, I can see that just “bringing it on over” isn’t as easy as it sounds. He’ll have to disconnect the lazyjacks, pull the mainsail and stack pack off the boom, put the mainsail away, drive over to Newport and drop it off… and lose possibly up to a week of sailing. Quantum also offered to send him some needles and sailthread, if dropping it off was too much work.

This is a very disturbing trend… many marine vendors seem to have no sense of responsibility and don’t stand behind their work or their company’s good name. What if this hadn’t been a stack pack, but a reefing point, like the one I just had put in? In a storm, the sail would have likely shredded itself due to the lousy quality of the stitching.

Two companies that originally were allowed to do fiberglass work at my marina have been deemed persona non-grata for similar reasons. Kelley Marine Services, which I mentioned in my OP, has also been banned for similar reasons.

Do these companies not realize that the marine world is rather small, and that regularly screwing their customers will eventually come back to bite them. So Quantum Sails Newport joins Kelley Marine Services, of Wareham, MA, and Peter Kennedy Yacht Services, of Annapolis, MD,  on the short list of blackballed vendors so far.

I’d also like to add a vendor to the white list.

Harding Sails, out of Marion, MA, did an excellent job with the third reef setup on my mainsail. Graham was kind enough to expedite my sail repair before the Fourth of July and, unlike many other vendors, very open about what was involved and the costs. I expect I’ll have them look at the canvas on my boat at some point.