It's been done before.

I imagine that if you have the freedom to select your weather windows, you'll be fine.

Check this out:

[url]http://www.sailblogs.com/member/winddancer/?show=fulltoc[/url]

Cheers,
Graham

First, Bill, thanks for your kind wishes for my wife's recovery. You and we both have the same idea - put aside the fulltime job and get out there cruising.

As for your choice, I used to think that outfitting a coastal cruiser for blue water cruising was a prudent option. After spending a lot of time and money making our C36 a much better long-term cruiser, I can see the logic in buying a boat that is already 90% of the way there.

I don't regret our choices, but the other path (buy the boat suited for your needs and get a different boat when that need changes) looks more attractive than it did before.

Best of luck with EVERYTHING!

Having given some thought to this over the years, I am a believer in the right tool for the job. And as much as I love our boat and believed it was right for what we planned to do with it, I don't think it is the right tool for crossing oceans. I know it's been done, people circumnavigate the coconut milk run route in boats that defy belief, and with skill sets that are non existent, but then again they don't all make it. You can't always be lucky as I have lately found out.

If it were me, I would be checking out YachtWorld for older Tayana 37's, a well proven blue water boat. They sell for I think close to what your Cat might bring. Then you have a good foundation to build on. My thoughts anyway.

Hi Bill, we should get together some time. I'm just up the road and with similar goals and a similar boat.

Another thought on this topic.

My C36 is old and some parts are worn down. Before I would contemplate setting out across the Pacific I would want to replace lots of stuff, like the standing rigging, and overhaul other stuff, like the engine. If I were to sell my C36 and buy a Tayana 37 or any other boat that I would be able to afford for the money my current boat would bring, I would be in exactly the same position. I would have an old boat (maybe not used for three years as is the least expensive Tayana 37 I found), and I would need to replace and overhaul a lot of stuff before setting out.

So to me, it seems that swapping out my C36 for another boat would only make sense if the new boat were _ready_ to go, as in, newer rigging and gear. Doesn't help to get a "blue water" boat if it's old and needs all the stuff doing to it that your C36 needs, IMO. If it were possible to get a "blue water" boat that was _ready_ to go for the money that an older C36 might fetch, then that would be great. But I believe that you would be faced with doing just as much work and upgrades on the new boat.

And if you are going to upgrade and refit the boat anyway, you'll do just as good a job on your C36. Your hull is _not_ going to break apart on the way to Tahiti.

Just my $0.02

- nick

But that is my whole point, it makes no sense to spend a pile of money on a boat that was never intended to cross oceans. It makes more sense to spend it on one that was designed for that purpose.

This topic has been hashed over a zillion times on sailing forums on the web. As always, your boat, your life, your choice, go for it. Extreme anything is the norm these days, so why not?

As I said, lots of people have done it in bathtubs with zero practical blue water experience and survived to tell the tale. Some didn't. Outstanding sailors have sailed junk around the world, some on purpose. But there isn't a 4 week weather window anywhere on this earth, there is just luck, good or bad, and if I was doing this, I would go with the tool meant for the job.

Just down D dock from me at Portland Yacht Club:

[URL="http://www.c36ia.com/node/1574"]http://www.c36ia.com/node/1574[/URL]

Having been well offshore in moderately big stuff, I don't think I would recommend it. There is too much flex in the hull; you'll see bulkheads moving more than I'm sure you'd feel comfortable with. The bilge is too shallow; you will see water pooling above the floor boards when you are on the same tack for more than a couple days. That's all just in moderately rough weather, I don't have experience in severe weather to form an opinion. Those issues can be addressed, but at what cost?

You also have the other upgrades you would expect to bring a coastal cruiser to bluewater standards (battery banks, solar, wind, water maker, limitations in tank capacity, etc).

I think I may have mentioned this in the past, but if it was easily doable, we wouldn't need a C36 hall of fame to recognize a C36 for going around the world. Don't hear of many Tayana 37, or Westsail 32 Halls of Fame.

Having said all that, it is doable; more so if you're careful about your weather windows. I just don't think it would be my first choice.

I saw one story about a C36 being modified extensively for a round the world trip, including moving the shrouds outboard to the hull, 150mm high toe boards and the like. If it came to doing all that, I agree with Bud - I would not have upgraded a C36 either!

When we were looking for a cruiser (for local sailing, but with the ability to travel to the tropics IF we wanted) we looked at about 36 boats. Most of the more traditional 'offshore capable' boats we saw were heavy, slow, old and worn and with accommodations that were to us quite claustrophobia inducing and unattractive. If a boat doesn't give you the warm fuzzies inside then I bet you never go far... 95% of our cruising is day hops or anchoring and we weighted this heavily. For living aboard we love our C36!

Our heaviest weather to date was leaving Wellington N.Z. We had 35 knots predicted - got 40 knots with fairly prolonged gusts measured at 55 knots at deck level, and a stronger one which broke our steering cable (which proved to be rusty. check your steering cable :o and carry a spare). Seas were not huge as it was an offshore breeze (see photo of assisting boat). Tried out our Jordan drogue which worked really well. We were running before.

If you try to fight heavy seas in a C36 you will likely lose, as others are saying. Actually I bet you will also lose in a Tayana 37 just not as soon!
Our plan is to:
[LIST=1]
[*]Avoid the worst seas;
[*]Reduce sail
[*]Prepare as well as possible for the worst;
[*]adopt passive tactics (Heave to / Para anchor / Jordan Drogue.
[/LIST]

BTW, we were 10 days stbd tack 30 knot winds to Fiji, 7 days port tack New Caledonia to NZ and no problem with bilge water. We work hard to keep it out though.

Others have pointed out if you modify your C36 too much it will affect the resale. Wind Vane steering is very likely in this category. All the mods we made I would want for travelling the coast of NZ, so we are not worried about this. A proper "Blue water boat" might have a smaller resale audience?

As I see it your problem is where to go after Fiji. Lots of US sailors sail down here to NZ (as did our PPO) and sell the boat. Back to Hawaii? This might mean more demands on boat and crew than we experience down here - anyone?

I'm in the camp that says it can be done on a Cat 36. As Rob and the many 36ers all over the world demonstrate, our boats are just fine sailing the various seas of the world. The issue is getting there, ie. the long passages. I think it's quite possible for a knowledgeable owner to beef up the 36 to the level of many "bluewater" boats. Maybe not to the level of a Hans Christian, but there are a lot of "less than a Hans Christian" boats plying the seas. Zak Sunderland's Intrepid is for sale on the dock next to mine and it doesn't look THAT special, yet it handled the Southern Ocean. Tankage and tank attachment, bulkhead attachment, rigging, sail inventory, steering and power systems are just a few of the areas that would need to be addressed, but these can be addressed slowly since we already own the boat and can make these changes over time. I might want a spare rudder as well. That being said, I have an even better solution to cruising on a 36 which also addresses Rob's point about "where to go next". I personally believe that a shoal draft 36 would be a perfect boat for Bahamas and Caribbean cruising and you might never run out of places to go next.

Mike

[QUOTE=LCBrandt;11580]Just down D dock from me at Portland Yacht Club:

[URL="http://www.c36ia.com/node/1574"]http://www.c36ia.com/node/1574[/URL][/QUOTE]

So, Larry, as has been asked before, but I've never found an answer, perhaps you know, what modifications did Mortensen make to his C36 before setting out? If any.

- nick

BTW Alaska Airlines has just announced non-stop direct flights Portland - Santa Barbara, so if you ever feel like getting out of the rain and visiting the Channel Islands, come on down!

Thanks for the invitation, but I love the rain. You live in a beautiful area, though, and it's been a long time since I've been there.

As for Craig's 36, the obvious mods were the windvane and HF system. Other than that, I'm not sure. I will call him and ask.

I remember that boat Rob mentioned. It sat on Yachtworld for a couple years. If I remember, it started out at around $100,000 and the last time I saw it, it was listed at around $40,000. They mentioned in the listing that they had spent somewhere in the neighborhood of $80,000 kitting it out. It was a pretty rough looking thing. They added a bowsprit, gave it a cutter rig, chainplates were mounted outboard on the hull as you mentioned, it had wind vane steering, etc. I'm actually pretty surprised I can't find it listed anywhere.

(disclaimer: If someone here owns that boat: it's a great looking boat, with a lot of character! Sail it in good health.)

Offering a counterpoint to my own position, check out this video if you have time. It's the first of a 10 part series of a guy taking his MKI to Hawaii in the Transpac. From what I understand he didn't want to do the 20-something day treck back to the mainland in it so he sold it there, but he DID make it. You can find his other videos by going to his page on youtube.

[URL="http://youtu.be/zRTgMxuxs8w"]http://youtu.be/zRTgMxuxs8w[/URL]

Good video. These two guys are clearly having fun - two EEs trying to work on their Universal. LOL! Seems to me they took a very laid back approach to their TransPac.

On the 12th video at about the 10 second mark you can see what looks like a whisker pole bent in half lashed to the stanchions, and the top lifeline is slack and not attached at the pulpit. Something must have happened. But if that's all the damage they had it's no big deal. The 6 videos I watched had little wind and it looked like Lake Ontario on a quiet day.

One other point, the Mark I has better seaworthiness numbers than does the Mark II so might be the slightly better choice for blue water. The capsize ratio and motion comfort indexes are both slightly better for the Mark I. The capsize ratio for bluewater boats should be below 2, the Mark I is 1.97, the Mark II is right at 2. I kind of think these numbers are high because they are using a displacement of 13500 lbs which we all know is a lot lighter than these boats really are.

Most of the boats on Catalina's Hall of Fame are 36s which I find interesting. We bought our boat for the Bahamas/Caribbean and I agree it is a fine boat for that purpose where you can pick your weather windows.

Excuse me while I sit up in my arm chair here.

I have not completed any extended blue water crossings, I have read extensive accounts of those who have and from those observations I think a C36 would be a fine boat for most crossings. I have noted the bulk of circumnavigators who note wind and sea conditions that are far milder than what is seen on a normall summer day on the San Francisco Bay. Most all of these accounts were made by folks who could afford the time to wait for favorable conditions before casting off.

Many of the old standards for a well rounded globe trotting cruiser where generated when there was much mystery and courage involved in going into the uknown waters of the world. With todays navagation aids, reliable weather forcasts and routing services you could probably make many of the oceans long crossings in a wicker basket.

The C36 may not be the best suited but, I beleive is more than capable on most crossings, I would not recommend it for the southern ocean, oround the horn and even the north Pacific between Washington and San Francisco can be dicey in any boat. As for the crossing from Southern California or Mexico to the Pacific Islands it sounds like running out of beer and bordom would be much greater danger than getting into conditions beyond the limits of our boats. If you just blindly go into the ocean with nothing more than a barometer and chart, you may want to consider an ice breaker with sails. With propper routing, knowledge and time I would not hesitate to take a well found C36 cruising.

Look what I found!!

It can be yours for only $39,000. Not the most elegant offering, but here she is... The Catalina 36OC (Oceanic Cruiser :D)

[url]http://www.sailboatlistings.com/view/17187[/url]

Can you surgically attach a third arm to your forehead? Maybe. Should you? Can be debated I guess.

But I still agree given enough time to pick the [B]right [/B]weather windows, I think it's possible to make the trip. I just wouldn't want to be caught in anything severe in it.

[QUOTE=akorinek;11616]Look what I found!!

It can be yours for only $39,000. Not the most elegant offering, but here she is... The Catalina 36OC (Oceanic Cruiser :D)

[/QUOTE]

So you reckon you can talk them down another $900? :D

Good detective work!

Thanks for posting that, akorinek. I have to say that she is definitely not my idea of a boat I want to own.

I meet a lot of armchair sailors in my business...they show up for basic courses full of strong opinions from years of reading and no seatime.Not wanting to offend or curb enthusiasm,i hold my tongue for the most part.Boats like this one are usually a result of these strong(shore based) opinions.(a shortened mast,outboard chplates!!)As for the right offshore boat,i used to say"go with what you have,just go!"but after years of log bashing and the threat of the N Pacific flotsam field i've become more cautious..maybe i value my sleep on the night off watches more now.

I agree with most of the comments. I currently have my Catalina for sale (but the market really is bad for selling) and will be looking for a Tartan for my long term cruising needs.

I've done two Baja Ha Ha's on the Catalina and it did fine. The last one I did was fairly rough weather but it handled it fine but I wouldn't want to be in extreme conditions with my boat. It's really not designed for off shore - contrary to what the Catalina folks will tell you.

There's lots of good blue-water boats out there that have been outfitted as well as updated. Good luck with your search.
Nancy

Nancy, I agree that the Catalina 36 is not 'designed' to be a blue water cruiser, and I think that Catalina themselves have never claimed that is was one. On the other hand, they would rightly say that it was intended to be (and many of us agree that it is) a superb coastal cruiser.

Well, I wan't going to add any more to this discussion but I'll try to put it in the form of a question, prompted by Larry's last comment.

What's the real difference between a coastal and a "blue water" cruise? Boats sink around here all the time, aften less than 20 miles from land. Nancy mentioned the rough conditions on her last Baja Ha-Ha. I have an acquaintance who did this last one in a C42 and described 36 hours straight of 30kts and waves and said his boat was kind of battered afterwards (new furler line needed, as he was using a reefed furling headsail) etc. There is the famous story of the C30 that was abandoned less than 200nm out of LA. Many C36 owners cross the Columbia or another bar every time they go out. SF Bay sailors cross the Potato Patch. The run that many of you do from the East Coast to the Caribbean is many miles and sometimes hazardous, isn't it?

So my question is really about conditions at sea, not the boats so much. Of course I understand that conditions in the open ocean in some parts of the world are guaranteed to be much more taxing and dangerous than I would want to be in aboard my C36 -- or any other boat. But I also think that you can and will run into heavy weather and seas while you are "Coastal Cruising" that will be no more taxing on your boat than what you will run into on a carefully selected ocean passage. At that point it's going to come down to your good sense, good decisions and experience, whether you are 10 or 1000 miles off shore.

This is a question, thoughtful opinions solicited :)

I did a bit of research on the difference between a coastal and a 'blue water' cruiser when looking for our boat...
A blue water boat needs to have a greater ability to look after it's crew, as you are a long way from help sometimes. It will have:
[LIST]
[*]A more sea kindly motion (usually at the expense of nippiness around the buoys)
[*]As mentioned by bstreet a better righting moment in case of inversion
[*]A stronger hull in case of bumping logs
[*]Smaller, stronger port lights
[*]Bullet proof self steering
[*]Greater tankage (or watermaker PLUS backup system)
[*]Deeper bilge and stronger keel and rudder attachment
[*]Cutter rig
[*]Better lifelines wider side deck areas and higher toeboards
[*]Smaller companionway and cockpit volume, larger scuppers, stronger (smaller?) transom etc
[/LIST]
and heaps of other stuff. My reading told me that the C36 was just or slightly better than adequate for blue water cruising. Ours had made the trip from Seattle to NZ and NZ to the islands and back (P.O.s) in what appeared to me to be inferior condition, so we upgraded essential systems and took spares. With improved communications and navigation I don't feel foolhardy in tackling the area we sail in - but I would NOT go round the Horn in her!

For day to day cruising in the Pacific islands we love her layout, and feel the compromises we made are an acceptable risk. Storm avoidance, heaving to and using passive storm tactics where possible are an essential part of the mix. We are NOT able to use active storm tactics for extended periods of time with just the two of us. I am undecided whether the Para anchor or the Jordan drogue would be our last resort in a storm, but we will hunker down...

Plus, we pray. And the harder the wind blows, the harder we pray ;)

Please do not misconstrue my thoughts, I am not suggesting that the C36 designed for sustained open water passages. The question posed was " Can our boats be taken to the South Pacific" I still firmly believe they can make this transit IF the boat is reasonably prepared and you have time to wait for favorable conditions. That does not mean that the boat is suitable for a multi year circumnavagation, though again with lots of time and select routing the C36 is not the worst boat I can think of for the the task. Many much smaller and lighter built boats make runs to the Pacific Islands on a regular basis. The Transpak, Longpak often see much lighter boats than ours making the run to Hawaii. Moore 24's Santa Cruz 27's have done it for decades. Amy Boyer made many long crossings in her Wilderness 21 in the seventies (her keel only fell off once). Have a look at the January issue of Lattitude 38's article Go small Go now.

No one disagrees that our boats are capable coastal cruisers, many of the oceans perils are near shore, more flotsom, shore induced currents, reefs and rocks, wind and wave patterns. It is common that summer time conditons in San Francisco Bay can be just brutal and ten miles out the gate they are benign. In the winter months I do not take my boat outside the gate, you must pick your windows anytime going off or near shore.

One of our skippers sailed his C34 from Vancouver, BC down to Mexico. He noted this:
[I]
I find it really interesting on the whole debate of what makes an offshore sail boat. It is unbelievable how much BS floats around and how many people have opinions but no experience based on the particular boat they happen to have an opinion on. I now believe it matters far more how the boat is prepared than what boat it is. Obviously you need a minimum standard in terms of hull integrity and rig strength and I think the Catalina 34 has that easilly. The question is can the boat and crew be prepared for offshore? I believe the answer question lies only with the skipper who does the preparation. In our case, we have had a fairly good shakedown cruise and I rate the boat highly. I've had "experienced" sailors who were aghast that I would take my family with no offshore experience in a Catalina 34 from Vancouver to San Francisco - a nasty bit of coast. And it takes some serious thought to call bull#### and say you're up to the challenge having never sailed in an ocean swell. I've also had experienced sailors who say go to the Marquesas and you'll find a lot of less capable boats than yours crewed by Europeans having the time of their lives. And you'll also find North Americans with real fancy boats with a lot of broken bits waiting for parts. [/I]

When we bought our boat in 1998, after 12 years with a C25 and a few before than with a C22, I thought it was bulletproof. Everything was bigger and stronger (more than proportionally for the added length).

Since then, and having sailed out the Golden Gate in some heavy conditions safely, I would not want to be on it in an unexpected storm at sea.

It's a great boat for its intended use: coastal cruising, where if the weather turns there's a place to go for safe haven. Not so "out there." That's usually not because of the weather itself, but rather the DURATION of the nasties. If I ever envisioned it, there would be serious upgrades and modifications that would have to be made, such as tank hold downs and the like, that would have to be investigated in detail. Non-electrical self steering would be a must-have, which would require a new swim ladder (we have a closed Mark I transom). That's just for starters.

I'd rather consider a completely different boat that was made for it, with more directional stability (i.e., a long keel, since I wouldn't be needing to turn around in tight marina fairways, etc., like I can do with our boat).

Your boat, your choice. :)

Here's a report from Steve (read the prequel, too, which includes that quote above) :[url]http://c34.org/bbs/index.php/topic,5699.0.html[/url]

Here's a photo of a catamaran called "Flash Gdansk" we met in Tonga. Crewed by a solo sailor (prob one of the best I've met) The boat came down from Europe (Poland). He brought it from Tahiti where his friend the owner had arrived and rebuilt the coach house with construction ply and ordinary glass (vertical!). Hardly ever uses the drop down outboard motor as it uses too much petrol and bounces clear of the sea in any kind of chop. He could short tack up the Neiafu channel! Here he has a girl from Chukotsky (Siberia) as bowman and is [I]sailing [/I]through between dangerous bommies in the "Japanese Gardens" in Vava'u.
We heard he made it down to New Zealand, and then back to the islands the next year. A badly found vessel with a skilful courageous sailor...

The other photo is an eighteen foot boat with three feet added aft. John (A 6 foot plus doctor) left the UK and sailed through the mediterranean using only an atlas, then the wrong way through the Suez and India to Tonga. Evidently whenever he struck a reef he just hopped in the water and shouldered his boat off!
Shown here in Neiafu he later arrived in NZ for the summer. Then moved on. Initially just courage, skill picked up on the way!

Their boats their choices as Stu says... these would NOT be my choice! ;)

Rob,

Making these trips is all about your personal comfort zone. Some will go in as I suggested a wicker basket, other will want a sailing version of a brick outhouse with umpteen spare everything. Both are likely to make the voyage without incendent, things will break on the brick outhouse regardlessly, it happens. All should and most will carry survival rafts, one in thousands gets used.

A boat like a Valiant or Hans Christian are surely better suited to go into challenging conditions enableing you to cast off when conditions may be less then perfect or unknown. I still contend that with planning and judgement our boats are up to the task of many crossings in known calm areas. The Pacific got its name for being placid. Our boats are respected as coastal cruisers, but rounding Point Conception at the wrong time can kill you or get you mometaraly closer to God no matter what you are in, your just as likely to see worse conditions there near shore than you may see in years of open ocean sailing. My first trip around Conception in the seventies, we encountered huge seas and gale force winds inshore, wound up going off shore about thirty miles and is was mild and pleasant.

True, Steve, yet down here the nice 7 day forecast can (and occasionally [I]does[/I]) turn into a nasty Low with a squash zone we can't avoid entirely. Weather routing helps :-) but is not perfect. I am confident our C36 will be as [I]safe as necessary[/I] and maybe safer than some cruise liners! Might not be as comfortable as a true 'blue water boat' though, that's our trade off for having such a lovely cruising home. ;)

[quote=montenido;11664]Hi all,

Still, a guy can dream, can't he ? :D

Cheers, Bill[/quote]

Yes, he can, but don't dream too long, get out there and do it before that dream turns to dust.

Bill, I'm with you. I plan to sail to the Sea of Cortez in a few years but my dreams lie further afield...the Marquesas. I will sail my C36 and plan to make her as best prepared as possible for that journey (not moving my chainplates outboard though). I will sail the Channel Islands and Point Conception several times before leaving for Mexico. Don't know how long we'll be in the Sea of Cortez..could be one year, could be ten, but I want my boat prepared for the coast of Central America and the 3-4 week run to the Marquesas. I've sailed Sceptre several times in 18' seas and 35 kt winds with no problems..and no water in the bilge! I'm not new to the sea and respect her more than most. I was a Deepsea Saturation Diver for 20+ years. I've worked seas all over the world and perhaps the worst I've ever been in was a nightime run along the east coast of Scotland in a 300' long Diving Support Vessel with three bow thrusters, two stern thrusters and two 1,200HP Kort Nozzles; we were rolling 45+ degress and even buckled our deck plates. This was all just 30 miles offshore. I am a very prudent sailor and know the limitations of our 36s but I feel that observing the seven Ps one can make it just about anywhere in the world (Arctic, Antarctic, Southern Oceans, North Sea, Sea of Murmansk and other nasty locations excluded). I would like to know what Craig Mortensen did to Patriot prior to his venture. Good sailing to all and keep your dreams alive.
Tony

Rob, you note that our boats may be safer than cruise ships, I assume you are refering to Italian ones.

Lattitde had a great quote from Winston Churchill who was known to frequent Italian Liners and asked why he was not on the Queen Elizibeth. The quote is very pertinent today. " I lke the Italian ships for three reasons. First, their cuisine is unsurpassed. Second, their service is quite supurb. And then- in time of emergency-there is none of this nonsense about women and children first."

[QUOTE=Steve Frost;11672]Rob, you note that our boats may be safer than cruise ships, I assume you are refering to Italian ones.

... then- in time of emergency-there is none of this nonsense about women and children first."[/QUOTE]

:D Yep, but Churchill might just have been elbowed aside by the [I]captain [/I]as he 'slipped' into the lifeboat!

When a 1'000ft long modern cruiseship with ultra sophisticated electronic navigation devices runs aground, capsizes, passengers and crew scramble like clowns to evacuate and lose a dozen or more lives......all within swimming distance of land...what a maritime shame as all of this happened in calm waters. Remember the 7 Ps! May the souls lost RIP.

Bill,

You note the difference in build quality between a Valiant and our boats, as I remember (a questionable virtue in my case) several years ago there was a review in Cruising World of the then new C380, they made a comparison to it and the Valliant 40 a well respected cruiser. They remarked that they were surprised that the weights and righting moments were very close to the same on the two boats.

As for messing about at Conception, use caution conditions can change there quickly. If you pick up a copy of Pacific Coast Pilot they refer to it as the Cape Horn of the Pacific. Conception and the Columbia River Bar are probably the two nastiest places on the west coast.

ok Tony,i'll bite...what are the 7 "P"s.Prep,patience,polyester.....?

Greig,
The 7 Ps are what I've abided by throughout my years at sea;
Proper
Previous
Planning
Prevents
Piss
Poor
Performance

As a Sat Supt I've had up to 18 divers under pressure in depths ranging from 400 -800 feet at any one time. It's kept me and my lads alive for many years.

I just had a long conversation with Craig Mortenson, talking about what he did with his C-36 Mk I, S/V Patriot, preparatory to his circumnavigation. Here are some of this thoughts filtered through my ears and translated from my brief notes:

He added HF and windvane.

Structural changes: None.

He replaced the rigging, but after talking to Gerry Douglas about his plans he didn't upgrade the size of the rigging because 'it's overdesigned as it is'.

He filled the cockpit with water and timed the drainage, and the result was 'pretty scary', so he put in a couple extra scuppers. Says he's not sure if that helped much but it made him feel better. [Note: Patriot is a Mk I; the Mk II would not have this issue.]

He said that 'the drogue probably saved' his boat, but not for the reason you're imagining right now. After the whale hit the boat, the rudder was jammed in a steer-to-starboard position. With the aux rudder they could make no headway at all, just turn to starboard. After much experimentation they found that if they deployed their Galerider drogue off the port quarter they could balance the boat, thereby allowing them to sail three days toward Australia where repairs could be made.

He says his 'key to success' was having the luxury of being able to carefully time the passages for 'the center of the weather window in every case'. 'That, and luck,' he says.

He was a very cautious skipper. He says he spent more time trying to slow the boat down than trying to speed it up. If the winds got more than about 18 kts he would reef or double reef to keep the stress on the rigging and rudder as low as possible.

Would he do it again? No, he says. He just spent a month on a friend's boat in South Africa and while he loved the interaction with other cruisers and the exploring ashore, he says 'the passages quite frankly are just the price you pay for the other things.' I asked him if the whole circumnavigation thing has burned him out on boats a bit? 'Yes, it kinda has.'

Larry,

I am with Craig on the long crossing thoughts, I guess many sailors get into a rythm off shore and enjoy the solitude. This I enjoy on a coastal cruise, getting out of the sight of land and enjoying the motion of a steady swell for a couple days. After that I am ready for a long hot shower, a hot meal not wrestled off a gimbled stove and a fresh supply of beer.
The long crossings hold little attraction for me, I can certainly understand wanting to be in some tropical location but, I would likely look for them along the edge of a continent.

It is odd reading this, I sound like my wife, who always enjoys the destination more than the journey, even when the journey is only a couple hours away. The journey is too short for me and too long for her, you would think it would give her more time to bask in radiance of my company, hmmm, maybe its not the sailing that tires her.

Thanks Larry for the follow up. That's almost a Jib sheet article right there, nice to hear from the horse's mouth how he feels.

It definitely sounds like we should start a SoCal South Seas-Bound C36 club; I count three of us so far! As to Pt. Conception; I think it's plenty heavy working up to San Miguel Island from a Santa Cruz anchorage, as far as practice goes. If you to are interested in coordinating some cruising, send me a PM.

Thx

Nick

As a young man in the late 70's,sailing a ferrocement piece of crap in the pre satnav era..i loved everything about what i was doing.Long passages included.At sea everyone gathered around the chart table to see the results of the noon sight crossed with the morning sunshot lop...it was like magic...being at sea was huge adventure and the sense of freedom in the S pacific was....well,i never got over it.Modern life is a process of salaries,bank accounts,assets and management short term and long...a small ship has a set amount of fuel,food,cash and crew cut off more or less from your wallet and key chain of shore life.Everyone aboard eventually is of one mind...heading and speed,the days run,the weather.its a bit different now,much harder to cut off shoreside connections at sea,constant gps position.Really its a process of being brought into the moment as fatigue,boat noises,weather,lone night watches, take over the mind and we become very small in a large,powerful environment.Its called the "sea change" and doesnt happen for everyone.If it happens to you,consider yourself lucky.If you hear the call,go.

I'd certainly like to talk with you guys; Nick & Bill, regarding your plans for sailing south out of CA. It'll be 2-4 yrs before I unshackle my land ties and riddance to them all. My business calls take me to your areas every now and then; I'd like to talk with some guys with similar plans. My email is [email]tonycullen(at)live(dot)com[/email]

Bill,

Found a link you may find of interest.

[url]http://www.passageweather.com/#[/url]

Steve

[quote=montenido;11713]
BTW, I look a little different from my avatar, LOL.

Cheers, Bill[/quote]

I thought that avatar looked like Mel Gibson's mug shot.
Yes no?