Time again to make good on the next installment of my New Year's Threat to write a series of posts about special offshore/bluewater prepping of medium-light finkeelers. Basic tenets of this series: (a) I don't have all the answers but just want to stimulate discussion; (b) not meant as a comprehensive offshore cruising manual but tries to address shortcomings (real or perceived) of Hunters, Catalinas, Beneteaus, etc. for offshore work); and (c) assumes one will be smart enough to stay out of the higher latitudes and the hurricane season. A - RUDDERS Large, unbalanced and unsupported spade rudders are highly efficient but inherently vulnerable to sideways forces (e.g. from quartering waves or during broaches) and collisions (e.g. with floating objects or u/w obstructions). Only the manufacturers know why not a balanced rudder design (i.e. with equal amounts of the wetted surface forward and aft of the rudder shaft) was chosen. Balanced rudders may be less efficient since more of the wetted surface remains permanently centered inside the turbulent wake of keel and propellor. Supporting the rudder by a full skeg would not only be prohibitively expensive as an aftermarket upgrade but creates the inherent risk of the rudder jamming after a grounding. Mounting a partial skeg would enable small floating objects to be deflected away but -- like the full skeg -- requires a very secure foundation in the hull in order not to create the even bigger risk of tearing up the hull. As usual, there are no free lunches to be had here..... Moreover, we all do like having large, efficient spade rudders 99% of the time we sail and, therefore, may be disinclined to give up performance and/or a bundle of money for the 1% of the time that having a stronger, more secure rudder would come in handy. Some pre-90s Hunter models acquired a bit of a reputation for losing their rudders, e.g. during offshore ventures. A surveyor (by the name of Kloppman or Klopmann, if I remember well) even had a website up with stories about Hunters that lost their rudders and left no opportunity unused to try and talk people out of taking their Hunters offshore for that reason. Improvements in rudder design and construction made in the 90s appear to have taken care of that (real or perceived) problem. However, rudder loss always remains a very real threat for any finkeeler with a large, efficient spade rudder (as opposed to a fullkeeler with a small but inefficient, aperture-mounted rudder). Our personal solution ("approach" is a better term) consists of the following elements: (1) inspect the rudder, quadrant and chain carefully before each offshore passage; also look for excessive corrosion at contact points between dissimilar metals; (2) provide for a workable emergency or accessory rudder (we chose the latter; as discussed under windvane); and (3) balance the sailplan in order to avoid excessive weather helm forces on the rudder (also important for autopilot and windvane). B - AUTOPILOTS In the early 90s we went through a series of electromechanical Navico wheelpilots and autopilots, while trying to avoid using hydraulic autopilots so we would not have to install a generator in order to keep up with the power usage. If you are good in repairing generators and hydraulic systems or plan to cruise in places where repair services and parts are readily available you may well come to a different choice. By first using the relatively low-cost solution of an electromechanical wheelpilot (the WP 5000), soon to be followed by conversion to the TP 5500, the heaviest tillerpilot Navico had to offer (this required installation of a special tillerarm directly clamped onto the rudder shaft) and always making sure we had a working backup tiller pilot, we were able to complete our first Sea of Cortez and Hawaii roundtrips (in 1993 and 1994, respectively) without having to steer by hand more than 25 % of the time. By and large, our Hunter Legend 43 proved to be a little too heavy and large for even the TP 5500 in heavy seas and we often had to carry out minor repairs (mainly by swapping TP camwheels, boards and fluxgate compass units). Also, the units proved to be susceptible to long-term (e.g. more than 48 hours) exposure to rain and/or spray. Fortunately, Navico proved to be a great company to work with; they always went beyond the warranty support requirements (too bad they are no longer in business under their own name). Nonetheless, this technical support is of no great use when you are in the middle of nowhere. So, before leaving for the sea of Cortez again in 1995 we had to make a choice between going hydraulic or installing a windvane. We chose the latter route and never have come to regret it. With what the windvane taught us about balancing our sailplan better we would probably also have been able to use the electromechanical autopilots to better advantage. Nonetheless, one critical difference remains: as wind and waves get stronger autopilots tend to start working less well whereas -- up to let's say 25-30 knots and 10-12 ft waves -- windvanes tend to keep working longer, especially when also steering with the sails on clos-hauled upwind or wing on wing (jib staysail) near-DDW (dead downwind) courses. C - WINDVANES Because of our open transom -- and the davits-mounted Tinker set-up -- our choices of windvanes were quite limited. On top of that one almost never meets any sailor who agrees with another one on choice of anchor, heavy weather technique or windvane... After a lot of comparing we felt good about going with ScanMar Marine's AutoHelm (not to be confused with the marine electronics manufacturer of the same name) because Scanmar sells two other windvane types (including the highly popular Monitor) and thus should be less prone to the "if you only have a hammer everything looks like a nail" affliction. Mounting the very large accessory rudder of the AutoHelm windvane meant losing much of the functionality of our swim platform (Nelleke and I are both enthusiastic scuba divers) and creating a recurring inconvenience when having to launch or hoist the Tinker. However, the advantages were huge: (1) no power usage; (2) a system that can handle heavy weather; (3) no parts that cannot be repaired with on-board tools; (4) an accessory rudder which is large enough to get us home if we lose the main rudder; (5) a longer waterline and better tracking vessel (e.g. easier to heave to); (6) reduced wear and tear on the main rudder set-up; and (7) having to learn how to balance the sailplan better. The 7th advantage only started feeling like one once we had learned to trim the various sail combinations better on the different points of sail, and the 6th probably needs a bit of explanation. With the windvane able to steer 90 % of the time (although we always try to make sure that new crew members get enough "helm time" to become reliable helmspersons) the helm is usually tied down in a pretty neutral position. If the windvane starts struggling to maintain course we will either adjust the sails or give the main rudder a bit more weather helm. By and large however, the main rudder, with all it's mechanical controls, is not constantly being moved back and forth by a pretty strong helmsperson bent on anticipating every wave or windgust. Amazingly, in terms of comfort, this is not such a big disadvantage as it might appear to be at first sight. Although no autosteering system can anticipate wave action like an experienced helmsperson can there is a surprising degree of automatic course adjustment that appears to be provided mostly by heeling forces and the natural changes in wind velocity between being on top of the waves or in the troughs. The long and the short of it is that, on those occasions where everything is trimmed right, it takes a pretty good helmsperson to outsteer the windvane. One more point: what good will an accessory rudder do if the same floating log that breaks the main rudder off also takes out the accessory rudder? This worried me long enough to design and install an automatic release system for the accessory rudder, somewhat similar to some of the auto-release mechanisms on larger outboards or Z-drives. Unfortunately, the problem is that the big accessory rudder is exposed to pretty large wave forces and that one has to tighten the release clamp tightly enough that there is no real way of testing the whole scenario without doing some damage. Until the day (may it never come) that this mechanism has proven its worth to my own satisfaction I don't feel like describing -- let alone advocating -- it to any fellow cruisers. The long and the short of it is: a good windvane should be a no-brainer for shorthanded blue-water cruising and is strongly recommended for longer offshore trips. See yah out there; Flying Dutchman PS The photograph shows co-skipper Nelleke during one of those few times that even the windvane (not very visible here, but situated above the davits-mounted Tinker package behind her) could not handle the winds and waves. HM
