Conference unifix::sailing

I assume that we are all aware that sailing is inherently dangerous, 
and that the risks we take become greater the further we venture from 
shore. It is because we are uncomfortable with risking our lives that we 
equip our boats with safety and survival equipment. Intuitively, we
purchase equipment that reduces our uncomfortable feelings about the
risks we are taking to an acceptable level. This intuitive approach
works well for ordinary sailing because the equipment cost is not too
great. 

The equipment each of us chooses depends on the sailing each of us does 
and on our experience. With a great lack of experience and considerable 
naivete Julie and I ventured off to Maine a year after buying our first 
boat, a C&C 26. As I recall, our ground tackle was a 12H Danforth with 
150 feet of 1/2 inch nylon rode and a 20H Danforth with 250 feet of 1/2 
inch nylon rode. This seemed adequate at the time. Several trips to
Maine and a trip to Nova Scotia later, we now carry three anchors (a 35
lb CQR, a 45 lb CQR, and a 20H Danforth), several rodes (250 feet 1/2
nylon, 275 feet 1/2 nylon, 300 feet 5/8 nylon, 100 feet of 5/16 high
test chain, and 200 feet of 5/16 high test chain), and an anchor
windlass on our 32 foot cutter. Our feelings about the risk of anchoring
are now reduced to a comfortable level and we sleep well at night even
during a moderate blow. Before going back to Nova Scotia, we would add a
65 lb Luke to the anchor inventory, though. 

Now then, on to the point of all this. Each of us has a limited budget
for equipment for our boats. The question is what choice of equipment
within that budget minimizes the risks we take. This is not, as it might
first seem, a simple question. And the question becomes ever more
difficult as one's sailing horizons expand. Assume that you are planning
a passage to Bermuda. There is an unpleasantly long list of disasters
that can happen -- sinking well offshore and fetching up on a Bermuda
reef are two possible disasters -- and some preparation must be made to
cope with them. But what preparation?

You can greatly reduce the risk of hitting a reef off Bermuda by buying 
a satnav. As long as the satnav works, no problem, and your passage is 
now much safer. If the satnav fails, you do have a trusty sextant, don't
you? A $75 plastic Davis or a $750 Plath? But what if buying a satnav
means you can't afford a liferaft? Now what? How do you decide what to 
do? 

Or perhaps the choice is between a Givens liferaft and an Avon liferaft.
(Discussing this choice is what led me to write this note.) I am willing
to grant that a Givens raft is superior in really severe weather. I also
feel that Givens is selling his product by appealing to one's quite
natural fears of bad weather. He is trying to convince you that the
choice is between survival (Givens raft) and death (any other raft). The
real choice is between a somewhat greater chance of survival (Givens
raft) and a somewhat lesser chance of survival (any other raft). People
on liferafts die from many, many causes. Raft capsize or failure in
severe weather is only one cause. I suspect that the major cause is the 
failure of one's will to live.

Givens also totally ignores the critically important point of cost. A
Givens is over $4000. A double floor Mark III Avon costs less than
$2000 purchased in England. For that difference in cost you could buy
much other equipment that would increase the probability of a safe
Bermuda passage significantly. Enough compressed gas inflated floatation
bags (less than $2000) to keep a 32' boat afloat plus an Avon would provide, 
I think, a much higher probability of survival than no floatation and a 
Givens raft, for another example.

The problem is still to decide what equipment choice to make. I would 
like to suggest that the concept of decision trees offers an approach to 
deciding what to do. These trees are best illustrated by an example or 
two.

Below is a decision tree that attempts to analyze the chances of
survival or death following sinking depending on whether one has a
Givens liferaft or an Avon liferaft. The number along each line is the
probability of the preceding event occuring. For example, the
probability of sinking in severe weather (from any cause) is assumed to
be 0.20. Note that the probabilities used are merely my estimates for
the most part. I would suggest you change them as you like and calculate
the results. The probability of survival or death at the end of any
branch is simply the product of all the probabilities leading to that
end of the branch. The sum of all probabilites must be 1.000. 

The results of using the probabilities that I have chosen show that the
overall probability of dying after sinking is only about 6% higher if
one has an Avon raft instead of a Givens. This is not really a large
difference given the uncertainty in the probability estimates. In either
case the probability of surviving is less than 0.50. (This makes me
think that avoiding sinking is an excellent idea.) 


SINK IN  N .80
SEVERE  ------- BOARD  N .05
WEATHER         RAFT  ------- DIE  .04
  |               |
  |               | Y .95
  |               |
  |             SEVERE   N .80
  |             WEATHER ------- SURVIVE  N .50
  |             BEFORE          OTHER   ------- DIE  .304 
  |             RESCUE          DANGERS
  |               |               |
  |               |               | Y .50
  |               |               |
  |               | Y .20       SURVIVE  .304
  |               |
  |             SURVIVE  N .20 Avon / .00 Givens
  |             SEVERE  ------------------------- DIE  .0304 Avon
  |             WEATHER                                .0000 Givens
  |               |
  |               | Y .80 Avon / 1.00 Givens
  |               |
  |             SURVIVE  N .50
  |             OTHER   ------- DIE  .0608 Avon
  |             DANGERS              .0760 Givens
  |               |
  |               | Y .50
  |               |
  | Y .20       SURVIVE  .0608 Avon
  |                      .0760 Givens
BOARD  N .20
RAFT -------- DIE  .04
  |
  | Y .80
  |
SURVIVE  N .20 Avon / .00 Givens
SEVERE  ------------------------- DIE  .032 Avon
WEATHER                                .000 Givens
  |
  | Y .80 Avon / 1.00 Givens
  |
SEVERE   N .80
WEATHER ------- SURVIVE  N .50
BEFORE          OTHER   ------- DIE  .0512 Avon
RESCUE          DANGERS              .0640 Givens
  |               |
  |               | Y .50
  |               |
  | Y .20       SURVIVE  .0512 Avon / .0640 Givens
  |
SURVIVE  N .20 Avon / .00 Givens
SEVERE  ------------------------- DIE .00512 Avon
WEATHER                               .00000 Givens
  |
  | Y .80 Avon / 1.00 Givens
  |
SURVIVE  N .50
OTHER   ------- DIE  .01024 Avon
DANGERS              .01600 Givens
  |
  | Y .50
  |
SURVIVE  .01024 Avon / .01600 Givens


                                   Avon     Givens

Total probability of survival:   .42624     .46000
Total probability of death:      .57376     .54000


Notes on probability estimates:

The probability given in the Pilot Charts of a gale any particular day
between Boston and Bermuda varies from .01 (July) to .03 (May). On the
average, there are only 0.3 to 0.4 cyclonic storms per month in June and
July whose winds exceed 34 knots. This is for the entire North Atlantic.

Probability gale on any given day:    .01       .03
Probability no gales in 5 days:       .9510     .8587
Probability no gales in 25 days:      .7778     .4670

There are many causes of sinkings. Bad weather is only one of them.
Hitting a whale or floating debris seems to be a major cause. Given the
relatively low probability of gales on a 5 day passage to Bermuda, I
think that the probability of sinking during bad weather is less than
0.20. Based on the insurance surcharge I have been quoted, the overall
probability of losing your boat on a round trip to Bermuda is less than
.01. 

Now, should one buy a Givens instead of an Avon? Still assuming a
limited budget, look at the following scenario. Assume you can either
buy a Givens liferaft or an Avon liferaft and a satnav. The decision
tree becomes: 


SINK BEFORE  Y .01  SURVIVE 
REACHING    ------- Avon/satnav  .0042624  (from decision tree above)
BERMUDA             Givens       .0046000
  |  
  | N .99
  |        N  .99 satnav / .98 no satnav    SURVIVE
HIT REEF  --------------------------------- Avon/satnav  .9801
  |                                         Givens       .9702
  | Y  satnav .01 / no satnav .02
  |
SURVIVE  N .20  DIE
HITTING ------- Avon/satnav  .00198
REEF            Givens       .00396
  |
  | Y .80
  |
SURVIVE  Avon/satnav  .00792 
         Givens       .01584 


                                Avon/satnav    Givens

Total probability of survival:   .9922824      .99064
Total probability of death:      .0077176      .00936

With this scenario, the probability of dying is about 20% greater if one
has a Givens liferaft and no satnav than if one has an Avon liferaft and
a satnav. Here I have probably overestimated the likelihood of hitting a
reef, but, as you will find if you try your own calculations, it is easy
to get lost in many, many decimal places. 

I would like to emphasize that the probabilities along the branches of
the tree are my subjective probabilities, ie, they are the probabilities
that I feel comfortable with. If you would choose different probabilities, 
do so and calculate the results. The whole point of this exercise is to
provide a somewhat objective method of choosing the equipment that
minimizes the risks of sailing as you see them. Your conclusions may be
different than mine, but they will be the right conclusions for you.
There is, I suspect, a lot of emotion involved in thinking about the
various dangers in sailing, and this may provide some helpful objectivity. 
By the way, the probabilities that you choose may vary with the type of
sailing you are planning. I would assume a greater chance of having to 
weather a blow at anchor during a trip to Maine than a trip to Cape Cod.

Analysis can be carried on to any length you wish. How about the
combination of an Avon liferaft and a Seagold manual sea water
desalinator ($695 and works in any weather) versus a Givens liferaft 
and a solar still ($250, less reliable, works only in calm, sunny
weather, and may well be munched by a fish)?

These decision trees also can provide some insight into which situations 
have the greatest overall effect on one's chances of survival. For 
example, in the first decision tree there is the event BOARD RAFT. Seems 
simple -- your boat sinks, you toss the liferaft over the side and leap 
in. What if a gale is blowing and a 20' sea running? How do you keep the 
raft along side long enough to get on board? How do you even get the 
raft over the side? How do you ensure that your survival kit stays 
tethered to the raft? Can you get your raft launched and your survival 
gear aboard in less than a minute (which is about how quickly some boats 
have sunk)? Getting your crew, yourself, and your survival kit aboard 
the raft is critical to your life expectancy -- more critical than which 
brand of liferaft you choose. The probability I chose reflects my 
feelings about crew and survival kit getting onto the liferaft. I don't 
think that I have been pessimistic, especially about the chances of 
getting aboard in bad weather.

Another point worth making is that you should consider preparing for the
most likely events first. Assume you are planning your first overnight,
offshore trip to Maine. It is relatively likely that you will make
landfall in dense fog (in our experience three times in seven trips). It
is relatively unlikely that you will sink. Therefore a loran would be a
better investment than an EPIRB (assuming you buy just one or the
other). It is relatively likely that you will encounter rough weather
(winds greater than 25 knots) making an offshore passage down East or
back (eight of 14 passages in our experience). Therefore safety
harnesses would be a prudent investment. To be sure, sinking is a
genuine catastrophe, but a liferaft is expensive. The same number of
dollars spent on loran, ground tackle, safety harnesses, extra bilge
pumps, and so forth will increase your overall chances of survival more
than a liferaft would. It is hard to convince yourself that not being
prepared for the worst is the best decision. We made our trip to Nova
Scotia without a liferaft. The unease we felt in a gale 75 miles
offshore during the return trip prompted us to buy a liferaft, but by
then we already had self-steering and a loran amoung other things. We
would give up the liferaft before the self-steering and loran. But only 
because we feel our boat is capable of surviving very bad weather. There 
are production boats I wouldn't take 25 miles offshore without a liferaft.

Clearly, if your budget is unlimited, then the only limit to the safety 
equipment you would carry is the size of your boat. I would like to make 
the point (needlessly, I trust) that there are certain minimal safety 
precautions you should take no matter what. Having survived a Gulf of 
Maine gale in a C&C 26, I would be reluctant to make an offshore passage 
from Marblehead to Maine again in that small a boat with virtually no 
safety equipment (no self-steering, no liferaft, no ability to cook in 
bad weather, no storm sails, and so on). I now know more about the 
risks.

One final comment if I may. Yesterday Julie and I attended a survival 
seminar given by Jim Givens (a lucid, clear presenter he isn't). I found 
myself at times during his presentation thinking that I should buy 
a Givens liferaft. After all, it is the safest raft. But .... it is the 
safest raft only if you encounter quite extreme conditions while in a 
raft. For the summer sailor the chances of sinking are small, and the 
chances of the extreme weather aren't all that high during the summer. 
Sure, it easy to point to examples of very bad summer weather, but what 
are the chances of being caught in that weather? It might be worth 
noting that in our daily lives we do not seek the maximum in safety. A
rather large number of people are killed in automobile accidents every
year. I think that the evidence is quite persuasive that using five
point seat belts, full coverage helmets, fuel cells, rollbars, and Nomex
flameproof suits would improve the chances of surviving a serious
accident quite significantly. Vitually no one goes to these extremes
except race car drivers. What we intuitively do is choose enough safety 
to feel comfortable with the risks. 

I hope this has been worth the time necessary to read it. Comments are 
as always welcome.

Alan

Wow, looking at your calculations, I'm glad Columbus didn't think to calculate
his chance of survival. I should be speaking Spanish now.

Seriously, I think sailing should be an adventure, that is a calculated risk
for shear pleasure. Mind you, I'm no Polyanna about it, but I think that
I would have talked myself out of some real fun times if I had really dwelled
on the probability of survival, like the time I took a new power poat from
Seattle to Vancouver with an uncalibrated compass, a depth sounder that
immediately went out and a radio I had no idea how to use. Still it was a
great trip.

The best investment you can make for your boat is in yourself. Take the proper
piloting and navigation courses for your trip and use the information. Plot
a course clear of the reefs. Keep alert watches and radio monitors, do as
many "fixes" as you feel comfortable with. Watch the barometer and decide
early if you are going to "beat the weather". If you aren't, go to deep water
and weather it with a storm anchor.

In the waters of Georgia Strait and Puget Sound the temperature was 55 degrees
year round. If someone fell overboard there was little or no chance for them
because of hypothermia. Yet I've never met a more loyal bunch of sailors.
They were all aware of the danger, but still enjoyed the boating to an enormous
degree.

One last thought, just how long do you figure you will be in a lifeboat,
assuming you had previously radioed your intent to abandon? If the water
temperature is not too severe, probably lifejackets would suffice.

Whatever you decide, enjoy your cruise..

I'm in agreement with Alan's approach and also very appreciative of the rigorous
model he's provided. It makes a tremendous amount of sense (to me) to sit down
and think out what is most likely to happen and act accordingly. I think you'll
feel more comfortable with your boat if you've thought out her requirements
rather than equipping her based on emotion. 

The closest thing I can come up with is the far less rigorous analysis I went
through when considering what sort of flare kit to get. My gut reaction was to
get the one with the largest possible flare pistol. Hey, it shoots higher and
they burn longer therefore we're better off, right? Maybe not. We'll be
daysailing in Boston Harbor so I've decided to go with the smaller gun and to
add orange smoke flares to the kit to provide another daylight signalling
capability to the standard flare kit Olin offers. A mirror would be a good
thing to add if Olin does't include one. I don't recall offhand if they do.

The majority of our safety effort and dollar goes to keeping the kids (8 & 4)
aboard - lifelines, nets, comfortable lifejackets, harness and jackline for the
4 year old to wear so she can roam about on deck. Our problem is that we have to
balance keeping them aboard and yet still making sailing a pleasant experience
that they'll want to pursue for the rest of their lives. Also, we'll do man
overboard games instead of drills. What it all boils down to is that safety is a
mindset that you have to work at all the time. 

Any comments on safety procedures with litle kids will be greatly appreciated.
you might want to put them in another note.

Ed
 

An interesting fact from Alain Bombard by way of Survival at Sea by 
Bernard Robin: 90% of those who are shipwrecked die within three days of 
the shipwreck (assuming, I assume, that they aren't rescued first), even 
though it takes much longer to die of thirst and hunger. The reason for 
this astonishing death rate is postulated to be panic and despair. 
Apparently it helps considerably to be prepared -- both in mind and 
equipment. 

Alan

It may be easy to put  relative  value  on  survival  equipment  while
safely  on  shore or while still safely sailing to your favorite port.
I believe that once in a life  threatening  situation  the  priorities
will  shift.   What  value  do you place on your life?  I have decided
that my life is worth a great deal.  There is much I still  desire  to
accomplish  before  I  meet  my  maker.  For this reason I purchased a
Givens liferaft.

It may well be that the superior quality  of  a  Givens  raft  is  not
needed  when abandoning ship if all you have done is run into a log or
whale and had your boat sink out from under you.  Many other liferafts
will be quite suitable in relatively calm conditions.  But what if you
do in fact loose your boat and there is  a  stiff  wind  and  mounting
seas?   I  have been in a 40 knot gale and 18 foot confused seas, have
had the boat fall off a crest into the trough, have  had  hundreds  of
gallons  of  water  cascade  over the entire boat.  After watching the
ease with which an Avon capsizes compared to a Givens raft I  am  very
happy  that  the boat survived the gale and we did not have to use the
Avon life raft.  I have been caught in three gales and a freak  squall
and  it  is  quite interesting how crazy the waves can become.  I feel
better knowing that if I ever had to abandon ship that I'd be  jumping
or climbing into a Given's raft.

I believe in being prepared for the worse.   I  choose  to  take  what
little space I have available on my boat for equipment and food, extra
clothing, spares, etc.  and not replace it with extra floatation  with
the  intent  of never needing a liferaft.  I choose to have sufficient
lifesaving equipment on board to be able to avoid danger in the  first
place.   I also, however, realize that there is sufficient large scale
garbage floating not so far offshore to cause  substantial  damage  to
most hulls.  A trip up from Norfolk, Virginia last year would have had
me extremely nervous had I not been aboard a steel  hull  sloop.   The
huge   logs   and   pilings  floating  by  could  possibly  have  done
considerable damage to a fiberglass  hull if hit  head on.   I  cannot
imagine giving up my liferaft as long as I intend to sail offshore.    

I believe that there is another issue regarding safety  that  has  not
been mentioned - SEASICKNESS!  I believe that it is important for each
member of the crew to be capable of taking care of him/herself and for
each  crewmember  to stand his/her watch.  I understand that the first
time in rough conditions one may be  taken  by  surprise  and  end  up
incapacitated.   A  "seasoned" sailor who gets caught in rough weather
and ceases to function in the capacity expected by  the  rest  of  the
crew is a danger to all aboard.

Jim Givens is a man driven to promoting safety at sea.  He may not  be
a  polished  public  speaker  but his heart is in what he is doing.  I
believe that he is an honest man and is trying to make us realize just
how  powerful the ocean is.  I don't believe that he is playing on our
fears to sell his product.  He  is  not  on  this  network  to  defend
himself  from  slanderous remarks so I'll attempt to do it for him.  I
am happy to know the man and I appreciate the  personal  attention  he
provides;  I  know  how concerned he is for my personal safety at sea.
For the record, I picked my Givens raft over all the others  before  I
ever met Jim Givens.

One last  thing,  even  with  sophisticated  weather  instruments  our
meterologists don't seem to do a very good job predicting the weather.
How in the world can anyone predict the possiblity of  a  disaster  at
sea,  much  less  the  possibility of surviving it?    Each of us make
safety decisions based on many factors.  I only hope that those  which
each  of  us  make  will be the correct ones for whatever situation we
sail into.

Pam, while I have the impression you are pooh-poohing the concept I have 
outlined in this note, you appear to have done what I suggested. You 
seem to have informally constructed possible chains of events, assigned 
probabilities to those events, and reached the conclusion that a 
Givens liferaft is the proper choice for you. While I may reach a 
different conclusion, your conclusion is the correct one for you and I 
won't argue that.

Me slander Jim Givens? Hey, calm down. I said before that I think that 
he has a superior product. Trying to sell us that product based on our 
fear of bad weather is no different or better or worse than salesmen 
trying to sell us life insurance, home smoke detectors, automobile 
safety seats for children, PFDs, etc, etc, etc, to protect us from 
events we fear. 

However, in his seminar Givens was in at least one way less than totally 
forthright (a common failing in salemen). Givens supposedly demonstrated 
the dangers of an Avon liferaft when Givens was able to easily capsize an 
Avon from the water. What Givens did not mention (that I recall) was 
that the Avon being used was a totally unballasted Mark I Avon. The 
current production Avon is the Mark III with several hundred pounds of 
water ballast. A little common sense and high school physics makes one 
realize that Givens would not have been able to capsize a Mark III Avon 
or similar raft. Givens' demonstration in fact demonstrated nothing vis 
a vis liferaft stability in bad weather and was also misleading.

One of the Coast Guard reports that Givens handed out at his seminar has 
some quite interesting data. In waves of 23 to 33 feet and winds of 41 
to 47 knots, a liferaft ballasted with 740 pounds did not capsize in a 
23 hour period. Rather impressive. To be fair (and I know you have the 
same report), a raft with 513 pounds of ballast capsized after 3 hours. 
And a raft with 330 pounds of ballast did not capsize in 25 hours. In 
waves of 33 to 36 feet and 34 to 65 knot winds, the raft with 740 pounds 
of ballast capsized in a breaking wave after 2.5 hours, was righted by 
its sea anchor, and was recovered 7 days later in good condition. No 
question but these are rather bad conditions. Givens, by the way, admits 
that his raft will capsize. He claims (and I won't disagree) that his 
raft will self-right after a capsize. This, to me, is the major reason 
to buy a Givens. The same Coast Guard report points out that in the 
truly appalling conditions of the 1979 Fastnet Race, only 4 of 15 
liferafts (all lightly ballasted or unballasted) capsized.

Since I haven't yet sailed in seas 30 feet or more (and hope to never do 
so) I can only wonder about the difficulty of getting any raft launched 
from the deck of a small yacht and then getting crew and survival gear 
aboard. I fear that the chances of getting on board aren't too good. 

The next speaker will please come to the podium.

    In his book ADRIFT, Steve Callahan describes his drift across the
    Atlantic in a 6-man Avon liferaft.  For what it is worth a lot of
    things went wrong with the raft - some due to shortsighted design,
    some due to bad luck - but his Avon, dubbed Rubber Ducky never
    did flip.
    
    As for me, if I were to run out tomorrow to buy a raft, I would
    ask a lot more questions besides how well balasted it is. Before
    reading Steve's book I would have certainly not had a good idea
    how to determine what constitutes a good survival raft and what
    does not. 
    
    Walt

I generally do a fair amount of research prior to purchasing any piece
    of gear for my boat.  I read specs, obtain first hand opinions,
    read books and finally make a value judgement based on the data
    I have collected and usually have a gut level feeling as to whether
    I am making the correct decision.  I imagine that most people do
    similar sorts of investigations prior to laying out the kind of money
    it takes to equip a boat.  
    
    I am not poo-pooing your methods, I am just recalling our discussion
    in which it first came up.  I happen to disagree that anyone can
    predict how they will get into trouble or when or what the sea
    conditions will be at the time.  The Fastnet is a good example; those 
    poor soles were quite unaware of the weather system approaching.
    Though I never took the time to count the number of rafts that
    capsized, I recall that there were quite a few and others just came apart.
    As I stated before, I try to buy the equipment that I believe will
    keep me from getting into trouble in the first place as well as
    equipment that may save my hide in any conditions since I will be
    unable to choose those conditions if and when I get into trouble. 
    
    Hey, what about seasickness?  No one likes to talk about it much
    less admit that they have a problem with it.  Having never been
    seasick I can not speak from experience but I have been sailing
    with many people who become incapacitated by it and either cannot
    or do not pull their own weight.  This puts the burden of sailing
    the boat on the remainder of the crew (if there is anyone left)
    and that I can comment on from a couple of experiences.  I have
    discovered to my horror that I can't keep going in rough weather
    indefinitely!  I discovered that I can get so exhausted that I'm
    not even aware of it.  That scares me.  I hope that just knowing
    that fact now can allow me to make different decisions when getting
    into a situation where I am forced to manage the boat alone.  I
    can heave to, run for cover if that is a reasonable possibility,
    continue under bare poles with a large sea anchor.  I have decided
    that since I don't have personal experience with some of the possible
    methods of staying at sea without killing myself that this summer
    I will practice these and other methods.  It makes sense to me to
    understand how the boat will react and what kinds of problems I
    may encounter.  It most likely will not be possible to try these
    things in the same weather conditions in which I may eventually
    need them but trying them in a stiff breeze with a moderate sea
    running is better than continuing to avoid the matter.
    
    Any comments on survival at sea besides the liferaft rat hole? I'd
    be interested in first hand experiences in rough weather and how
    you handled it.
    
    Next... 
    
    

Pam raises an important point concerning incapacitation of crew members.
A crewperson can become unable to function for reasons other than
seasickness, among them hypothermia, fatigue, injury, and fear. Some
thought should be given to dealing with all of these, though more can be
done about some of them than others. Indeed, each of these is a long
note unto itself. Incapacitation of crew members is not, as you might
first think, only a problem on long passages (say those over 24 hours).
It doesn't take long to become hypothermic on a wet, windy day, and
injury can happen any time. 

Some brief thoughts on fatigue follow.

Many of today's racer/cruisers just are not comfortable sea boats. Their 
flat bottoms tend to pound, many of them are tiring to steer, either 
lacking directional stability or a comfortable place to sit or both, and 
many of them are wet. Being cold contributes greatly to fatigue. (True, 
these boats are fun to sail in good weather.) Thus avoiding excessive 
fatigue is difficult even though necessary.

There is not much you can do about the motion of your boat except endure
it. Make stout lee cloths for the settee berths and you can sleep any 
time. Julie made our lee cloths and we and crew have slept soundly and 
well in a gale. (I have yet to find a quarterberth in a boat under 40' 
that I think I could get in or out of safely in very rough weather.)

Effort should be made to make a boat easy to sail shorthanded. Large
self-tailing winches make life easier. Slotted roller furling headstays
are nice as long as you don't have to change a sail. We have a cutter
with hanked on staysail and jibs. With downhauls rigged, we don't need
to go the foredeck until storm jib time, and we can drop a jib as easily 
and as quickly as one could be roller furled. With our hanked on jibs 
Julie has gotten a 100% jib below in a gale without my having to help.

Probably the most important piece of equipment that make a boat easy to
sail is good self-steering. It is not possible for two people make long
passages without self-steering if they want to avoid fatigue.
Self-steering is worth at least two additional crew. We have a Autohelm
2000 (old version) that has steered in calms and has steered in gales.
Julie and I made a 275 mile passage back from Nova Scotia by ourselves
without undue fatigue, including weathering a 12 hour gale. I'm not sure 
I'd crew on a long passage unless the boat had a very good self-steering 
system (or a big crew).

RE:1330.9 by AKOV12::DJOHNSTON

> Of course one can have an ultra safe, ultra equipped boat with redundant 
> features.  Most of us have to prioritize based upon what we want to carry 
> and what we can afford.  

This was the point I was trying to bring up.  The AM radio as an example.  
Lorans are nice.  Better have a backup though,  and learning to use a AM radio
as a RDF (and marking a few transmitter locations on charts) is _cheap_ 
insurance.  A real RDF would be nicer,  but is more expensive.  A second loran
or a Satnav even more.  Redundant does not have to mean maximum bucks.

================================================================================
RE:1330.10 by MSCSSE::BERENS "Alan Berens"

> On the other hand, the careful coastal sailor is unlikely to need a storm 
> jib (I haven't needed mine in the last 10 years). 

A question:  If you had a storm jib,  would your C&C26 have gone upwind to
shelter in the gale 1330.1 talks about?

As for how often you will need one,  it depends on boat,  location and owner.
I found it nice to switch down to it about 3 times a season.  Never _really_
needed it,  but it can reduce the stress level on crew in marginal weather.


> I wouldn't buy inadequate foul weather gear just so I could buy a storm jib. 

I bought Achilles gear for about $100 three years ago,  and it has kept me 
warm and dry in some fairly crazy stuff.  I know that a multi thousand dollar 
custom made survival suit would be better,  as some of those are rated to keep 
one warm and dry(!) in freezing sea water for as much as three days.  If I was
was sailing in the Gulf of Alaska or rounding Cape Horn...

BTW:  Has there been any Practical Sailor ratings on foul weather gear?


Phil

re .10:

>>> A question:  If you had a storm jib,  would your C&C26 have gone upwind to
>>> shelter in the gale 1330.1 talks about?

No. This gale was, given our limited experience, lack of equipment, and the 
boat, truly a situation in which our survivial was in considerable doubt. We 
did not have an anemometer, so I don't know what the wind speeds were. But, 
since the crests of the waves were being blown downwind in long streaks and 
since the sea was as much as half white with foam, it was windy. I've not seen 
these things in the less severe gales (under 40 knots) that I've been in. 

As to seeking shelter ...... you're the second person whose asked this. 

The Maine coast has many, many, many outlying rocks, ledges, and islands
and is very dangerous to approach in bad weather, especially if your
position is at all doubtful (as ours certainly would have been). Even
though the wind was roughly parallel to the coast, on any approach there
would be ledges and islands to leeward, and lee shores are to be avoided
even in the best of conditions and even when aboard a boat that can sail
to windward in a gale. More boats are lost from going ashore than are
lost at sea. Often staying at sea is safer than seeking shelter. I think
that this was one of those times. Still worse, many of the Maine harbors
have narrow entrances though the ledges and can be tricky to enter, 
especially for the first time. This was, after all, our first cruise to 
Maine. 

Though the visibility was good, seeing navigational aids and the dangers
in the big seas would have been quite difficult. Our deadreckoning
position was quickly at the very best a wild guess, and, as Monhegan is
some ten miles off the coast, the chances of finding any particular
place along the coast were close to nil. Remember, this was before
loran. 

The above is somewhat based on hindsight and later experience. We didn't
really even consider heading inshore. The wind and sea conditions were
such that attempting to reach across them in a C&C 26 would have been
extremely risky. It might have been possible, but a knockdown from wind
and/or sea was all too likely (the C&C is a very tender boat). Even with
just a reefed jib we were heeling quite a lot when we slewed off course.
Running off seemed much, much safer then (and still does). 

>>> As for how often you will need one, it depends on boat, location and owner.
>>> I found it nice to switch down to it about 3 times a season. Never _really_
>>> needed it, but it can reduce the stress level on crew in marginal weather.

Good points. Every boat and crew is different, and what works well for one 
boat/crew may not work well for another. For our boat, being a bit overpowered 
(doubled reefed main and 100% jib up to 30 to 35 knots) results in more 
comfortable motion. Plus, since our boat tends to excessive weather 
helm, more headsail area and less mainsail area is better than a storm 
jib and a reefed main.

Along these lines, I noticed that we all (me included) rarely make clear 
the basis of our comments and recommendations. For example, long-time
readers of SAILING know that I am a hard core cruising type and that
Dave Johnston is a hard core round the bouys racing type. This obviously
gives a bias to our views which new readers of SAILING won't realize. 

>>> BTW: Has there been any Practical Sailor ratings on foul weather gear?

Yes, and the results were that expensive is good, inexpensive usually 
isn't. 

Alan

RE:254.11 by MSCSSE::BERENS "Alan Berens"

PH> A question:  If you had a storm jib,  would your C&C26 have gone upwind to
PH> shelter in the gale 1330.1 talks about?

> No. {and} The Maine coast has many, many, many outlying rocks, ledges, and 
> islands and is very dangerous to approach in bad weather, ...

I was thinking more of a return to Monhegan starting perhaps 5 minutes after 
you left it's shelter.


PH> BTW: Has there been any Practical Sailor ratings on foul weather gear?

> Yes, and the results were that expensive is good, inexpensive usually 
> isn't. 

I'd love the see a copy if someone can dig one up.


================================================================================
RE:1330.12 by BOOKS::BAILEYB "Crazy in the sunlight, yes indeed!"  

> Masthead running lights ???  Nice,  but you can survive without one.

As long as nothing runs you over at night.  Masthead lights can be seen for
miles.  Deck level lights will not be!


> Getting back to the matter of foul weather gear, Dave's point in .4 had
> to do with the way wet and cold can impair your physical and mental
> ability.  This is a valid point.  

Yes.


> Good foul weather gear can go a long way.  As can the sweaters/pants you 
> mention.  

As can the polypro you mention.  My point was that buying the "BEST" in foul
weather gear (or anything else) is almost worthless if you don't cover the 
rest of the bases.  I'd bet that $400+ foul weather gear over cotton would 
NOT keep one as warm or dry as a $20 "rainsuit" over polypro underwear and 
wool pants and shirt on a 40 degree rainy and windy day.  Of course,  _both_ 
are somewhat silly (and dumb) extremes.


Phil

re .12:

By the time it was obvious that we should return to Monhegan, we
couldn't. The anchorage area was upwind -- couldn't sail and the 7 hp
inboard (and very small horses at that) wasn't strong enough to power
upwind. I don't know if you've ever been to Monhegan, but the entrance
into the anchorage area, as I recall (having never been back) is narrow
and the rocks and ledges numerous and large. Even had going back been
possible, it would have been quite risky. Also, our ground tackle was
woefully inadequate for staying at Monhegan. In fact, that's why we
decided to leave. 

I certainly won't claim that we made entirely intelligent or rational
decisions that day, but I think that by and large, given our knowledge
and experience, the decisions weren't bad ones. A disaster is sometimes 
the result of a series of slightly wrong decisions. We were 
unquestionably lucky. 

re whichever:

Bob Bailey makes an extremely important point: Don't go sailing if you 
can't go sailing safely. The problem is knowing enough to go safely. We 
thought we were being careful and simply didn't know enough to know we 
weren't. Sharing experiences through SAILING is one way of gaining 
knowledge, insight, and experience.