Overseas Solo Sails...

[ChrisRamsey]

Hey everyone,

I was hoping I could find some people who've done a solo sail over one of the big oceans.

I'd love to sail to NZ/AUS sometime in the next year or two but don't have anyone to do it with just yet.

Might see about getting a crew, maybe a captain who's been sailing longer than me - but if I could do it by myself, that would be a great notch to have in my belt.

Anyway, I was wondering about the pros and cons of such a trip.

I'd be sailing from Cali, slowly. Probably stopping in Hawaii along the way.

 

[Ross]

Read the logs of Donna Lange and the novels of Tristan Jones. Read the works of Lyn and Larry Pardey. Dreaming is one thing reading about the true experience is another.

 

[txtowman]

great fun if you got plenty of cash!

 

[sailingdog]

Read Webb Chiles's recent articles, as he is based out of Opua, NZ. He has done five circumnavigations, including an aborted one that was about 11/12's complete in two open 18' Drascombe Luggers. He did this in two boats cause the first one was confiscated by the Egyptian government, and he was sent the second one so he could continue.

A lot of this depends on the boat... a better boat will take care of its crew... a bad boat will get its crew killed. A lot of this depends on your skills. There have been many who have thought of doing something like this but didn't do the proper preparation and failed miserably. Ken Barnes, David Vann, Heather O'Neill, and Ronnie Simpson come to mind.

Ken had a fairly decent boat, but IMHO wasn't prepared, and the boat wasn't prepped properly. In his one knockdown, the batteries (4Ds IIRC) went bouncing around the cabin and smashed out hatches and such... IMHO, the boat was too big for him.

David Vann, who thought of Barnes as a role model, was an idiot that didn't have a clue about how to design a proper trimaran and his faulty design started to break up in 2' seas with 15 knots of wind or so....

Heather had a great boat—one of the last Flickas built—but she didn't prepare herself or shake the boat down properly and aborted her voyage basically one day after leaving. She managed to get herself locked out of the cabin in heavy weather and had to hack a hole in the boat to get back in IIRC. She failed her boat, not the other way around.

Ronnie Simpson was more concerned about his media capabilities and timed his departure, not to a weather window, but to make the evening newscast. He bought a fair bit of HD video gear to document his voyage, but couldn't be bothered to get a 40-something year old boat surveyed or inspected....

Donna Lange, on the other hand, was a sailing novice in her early 50s when she bought her Southern Cross 28 IIRC. She gradually worked her way up from daysailing to a full-blown circumnavigation. She was one of the boats that responded to Ken Barnes and went through much the same weather systems as he did, in a much smaller boat, yet had no issues... because both she and her boat were prepared properly.

 

[TimCup]

An idiot?

"David Vann, who thought of Barnes as a role model, was an idiot that didn't have a clue about how to design a proper trimaran and his faulty design started to break up in 2' seas with 15 knots of wind or so...."

I'm reminded of the tests for President Reagan's "Star Wars Initiative", a missile defense system from space.... 9 of 10 criteria were met, yet they missed the target by over 100 miles! I don't think they were idiots.

David Vann hit at least "9 of 10" criteria in building a boat from an idea on a piece of paper. Other than Roger Long, not many, if any, on this site could have done as well. His writing style led me to question his plan, his ability, even his sanity! Virtually untested, no auxillary propulsion... and you want to circumnav?

His boat was ugly. The engineering of the struts were faulty, as was the build. So, take him to task for those things. Or other faults you find.

Name-calling takes a shot at the person instead of his actions. He deserves better. Unless, of course, you know him intimately..

cup

 

[Ross]

Re: An idiot?

A poorly informed, isolated inventor doing the best he can with his kowledge and experience may fail in his endevors. But when a person has the resources of the world as close as the keyboard on his computer and fails to make the best possible use of them there are many labels that could be used to discribe him and his efforts but I can not think of any that are complimentary and most reflect unfavorably on his intellectual ability and his pride in self.

 

[Warren Milberg]

I'm glad to see Ross described Tristan Jones' works as novels. The guy had a great life and a great imagination....

 

[sailingdog]

Common sense says that you don't design a trimaran with the akas crossing to meet at the center of the main hull.

Here is an overhead view of his design:

Making the akas that way, especially with substandard salvaged materials such as he was using, pretty much guarantees failure of the akas. Mind you, the boat started to fail in conditions that wouldn't challenge a SUNFISH dinghy. The aka design gives the amas almost ten-fold leverage against the akas at the main hull, and they failed exactly as I predicted when I first saw his design.

Also, professing that you admire someone like Ken Barnes and have him as a role model doesn't help his case much.

BTW, I did try to contact him via Esquire magazine regarding my concerns about the aka design and did not hear back from him.

"David Vann, who thought of Barnes as a role model, was an idiot that didn't have a clue about how to design a proper trimaran and his faulty design started to break up in 2' seas with 15 knots of wind or so...."

I'm reminded of the tests for President Reagan's "Star Wars Initiative", a missile defense system from space.... 9 of 10 criteria were met, yet they missed the target by over 100 miles! I don't think they were idiots.

David Vann hit at least "9 of 10" criteria in building a boat from an idea on a piece of paper. Other than Roger Long, not many, if any, on this site could have done as well. His writing style led me to question his plan, his ability, even his sanity! Virtually untested, no auxillary propulsion... and you want to circumnav?

His boat was ugly. The engineering of the struts were faulty, as was the build. So, take him to task for those things. Or other faults you find.

Name-calling takes a shot at the person instead of his actions. He deserves better. Unless, of course, you know him intimately..

cup

Well said Ross. If David Vann had been doing this 40 years ago, then it might have been excusable. However, with resources such as Boatdesign.net and the historical record of existing trimaran designs, I fail to see how the word idiot does not apply to Mr. Vann.

A poorly informed, isolated inventor doing the best he can with his kowledge and experience may fail in his endevors. But when a person has the resources of the world as close as the keyboard on his computer and fails to make the best possible use of them there are many labels that could be used to discribe him and his efforts but I can not think of any that are complimentary and most reflect unfavorably on his intellectual ability and his pride in self.

 

[Roger Long]

Does "None Yet" mean "None yet" or "None now"? If "none ever", you're got a lot of sailing and cruising to do before you tackle something like that.

 

[sailorkoop]

"David Vann, who thought of Barnes as a role model, was an idiot that didn't have a clue about how to design a proper trimaran and his faulty design started to break up in 2' seas with 15 knots of wind or so...."

I'm reminded of the tests for President Reagan's "Star Wars Initiative", a missile defense system from space.... 9 of 10 criteria were met, yet they missed the target by over 100 miles! I don't think they were idiots.

David Vann hit at least "9 of 10" criteria in building a boat from an idea on a piece of paper. Other than Roger Long, not many, if any, on this site could have done as well. His writing style led me to question his plan, his ability, even his sanity! Virtually untested, no auxillary propulsion... and you want to circumnav?

His boat was ugly. The engineering of the struts were faulty, as was the build. So, take him to task for those things. Or other faults you find.

Name-calling takes a shot at the person instead of his actions. He deserves better. Unless, of course, you know him intimately..

cup

i disagree! He's an IDIOT!...a person is judged by his actions. To say otherwise is ludicris. If you see a man walking down the street in the dead of winter, nude and wearing his underwear on his head, i suppose you say he's probably a smart man..just has some funny actions. The star wars analogy had no merit at all. Comparing Star Wars with building a sailboat is a streach don't ya think?..They tested the missle program before they tried to use it to save the world!!!..SEE A LITTLE DIFFERENCE THERE?.......Just like the kid that decided to live with the Grizzley bears in Alaska. Guess what? They ATE HIM!!.....nice kid...meant well.....but he was an IDIOT...and he's now dead for it.

 

[Roger Long]

She was one of the boats that responded to Ken Barnes and went through much the same weather systems as he did, in a much smaller boat, yet had no issues... because both she and her boat were prepared properly.

Much as I admire Donna Lange and her incredible grit, 36 hours at the helm in weather that has had crews of strong experience guys calling for the choppers, I can't agree that her preparation had anything to do with the different outcomes for her and Barnes. The conditions they were in are much like soldiers running across a field of mortar fire. If one gets hit and another doesn't, it isn't fair to say one was running faster or smarter or was better prepared. If the wave that had hit Barnes had hit Lange, she probably would have disappeared right there.

OTOH, if Donna had been in Barnes boat and been hit by that wave, I'm sure she would have sailed it into Chili under jury rig instead of calling for evacuation. She's that kind of gal.

 

[sailingdog]

Roger—

Wouldn't you say that Donna was much more prepared as a sailor than Ken Barnes was??? Doesn't that count as part of her preparation. Ken Barnes did little to shake down his boat as I recall... Donna, IIRC, worked her way up progressively from day sails, to short coastal cruises, to longer coastal cruises, to short bluewater passages, to longer bluewater passages and then finally her circumnavigation.

She also knew Inspired Insanity pretty much like the back of her hand, while Ken Barnes had trouble figuring out which way to trigger the autopilot to turn further downwind according to his own boat logs and blog at the time.

Much as I admire Donna Lange and her incredible grit, 36 hours at the helm in weather that has had crews of strong experience guys calling for the choppers, I can't agree that her preparation had anything to do with the different outcomes for her and Barnes. The conditions they were in are much like soldiers running across a field of mortar fire. If one gets hit and another doesn't, it isn't fair to say one was running faster or smarter or was better prepared. If the wave that had hit Barnes had hit Lange, she probably would have disappeared right there.

OTOH, if Donna had been in Barnes boat and been hit by that wave, I'm sure she would have sailed it into Chili under jury rig instead of calling for evacuation. She's that kind of gal.

 

[Roger Long]

Wouldn't you say that Donna was much more prepared as a sailor than Ken Barnes was???

Absolutely. Barnes had better equipment and a far more capable boat but the most important stuff isn't gotten with a checkbook.

However, it easily could have turned out the other way when it comes to a wave knockdown and dis-masting. A lot of things at sea are simply random.

Donna was lucky in a lot of ways. Remember, she manged to hit, as in "BUMP!" South America straight on. Fortunately, she hit a steep and kelp cushioned enough part of it than she simply bounced back off instead of sticking and having her boat pounded to bits.

 

[Ross]

reading the works of Jack London provides great insight to the human character. I would not attempt an ocean crossing without reading about a hundred books and sailing for a year or two in all manner of weather.

 

[sailingdog]

Just remember, in many cases, it is the sailor that fails the boat, not the boat failing the sailor.

 

[Joe]

I followed Barnes for a bit and was not surprised that he failed.... He was extremely confident with his strategy... a big steel boat to muscle through the tough stuff. But a boat is more than just a hull. I felt he didn't have the respect for the sea and weather he should have had. He whined about the slapping and banging of the rigging then expressed surprise at the amounts of chafing on halyards, sheets and control lines, yet took no action to reduce it. Ongoing preventative maintenance is fundamental to safe sailing and neglecting this was his undoing.

 

[TimCup]

I'll stand by my statements-

"Common sense says that you don't design a trimaran with the akas crossing to meet at the center of the main hull."
"Making the akas that way, especially with substandard salvaged materials such as he was using, pretty much guarantees failure of the akas."

Sorry, but I don't agree with your conclusions- saying he didn't follow accepted ways of building precludes finding a "better way". Ford's new diesel has the exhaust manifold on the TOP and the intake on the BOTTOM. Different can be better.

"If you see a man walking down the street in the dead of winter, nude and wearing his underwear on his head, i suppose you say he's probably a smart man..just has some funny actions."

I guess YOU'D call him an idiot. I wouldn't say he's smart or stupid, I'd say his actions indicate he has a problem. That's why I think name calling is unnnecessary....

"To say otherwise is ludicris". Ludicris is a rapper...not really my kind of music.... see how I can criticize an action without attacking the person? THAT WAS THE POINT OF MY POST.


cup

 

[Ross]

"Common sense says that you don't design a trimaran with the akas crossing to meet at the center of the main hull."
"Making the akas that way, especially with substandard salvaged materials such as he was using, pretty much guarantees failure of the akas."

Sorry, but I don't agree with your conclusions- saying he didn't follow accepted ways of building precludes finding a "better way". Ford's new diesel has the exhaust manifold on the TOP and the intake on the BOTTOM. Different can be better.

"If you see a man walking down the street in the dead of winter, nude and wearing his underwear on his head, i suppose you say he's probably a smart man..just has some funny actions."

I guess YOU'D call him an idiot. I wouldn't say he's smart or stupid, I'd say his actions indicate he has a problem. That's why I think name calling is unnnecessary....

"To say otherwise is ludicris". Ludicris is a rapper...not really my kind of music.... see how I can criticize an action without attacking the person? THAT WAS THE POINT OF MY POST.


cup

Sometimes when we observe that a person has a problem the "problem" can usually be defined as a mental illness or chemical imbalance, ignorance, which can be cured through education, or stubborn determination to ignore any and all advise and experience from others and doggedly continue on a path of his own choosing. The latter is often referred to as congenital stupidity for which there is no cure. There are many forms of behavior that just don't suit me but these are based on belief and personnal preferrence. Music comes in many styles some pleases me and much of it does not but it all has its merits. Some political commentary I find repugnant but the speaker probably believes he/she is right but that is subject to peer review.
Reinventing a trimaran with a completely different comcept and then not extensively testing it is not clever and could find many labels being applied that you find extreme.

 

[TimCup]

stubborn determination to ignore any and all advise and experience from others and doggedly continue on a path of his own choosing. The latter is often referred to as congenital stupidity for which there is no cure. quote]

Sorry Ross, I respectfully disagree.

ALL advice and experience told us the earth was flat. Someone refused to listen to accepted fact. We should all suffer from congenital stupidity...

Edison a thousand times to find a filament for his light bulb. Mr. Vann had an idea, and failed once. That makes him a idiot??

"Reinventing a trimaran with a completely different concept and then not extensively testing it is not clever and could find many labels being applied that you find extreme".

I didn't find this label, or any other, extreme. I call it wrong. A man can do something stupid without BEING stupid (ask Tiger Woods). Criticize the act.................

On second thought, never mind. The simple request for civility I made has met more criticism than I thought possible. I have misjudged my fellow readers.


cup

 

[sailingdog]

Tim:

From Wikipedia:

An Idiot is a mentally deficient person, or somebody who acts in a foolish, self defeating, uneducated or counterproductive way

The second part of the definition pretty much describes David Vann to a "T". His goal was to sail around the world in a home-built aluminum trimaran. His design skills were so poor that it prevented him from achieving his goals. He clearly had access to resources that would have told him that his design was deficient, but either chose not to utilize those resources or ignored the warnings they would have given him. That kind of behavior is foolsh, self-defeating and counterproductive. It is also the sign of an ignorant or uneducated person. I stand by my description of David Vann being an idiot. As I said previously, if Mr. Vann had utilized any one of a thousand resources, he could have easily found out that his design was at least unlikely to succeed, if not guaranteed to fail, as it was... and modified the design before setting out to build his boat.

Innovation generally takes a lot of time and effort. Trying to innovate based on a single attempt is rather foolish, especially when said attempt involves dealing with the forces seen on a circumnavigation. Again, as I said before, his design failed in conditions that most Sunfish sailors would laugh at... and certainly no where near the rigors of a Southern Ocean passage.