Sailing without a motor

[pfam]

I wanted to get some honest ideas on how possible it would be to sail without a motor. Obviously the sailing part if easy. I'm talking about raising the sails when your not pointed to the wind. Things like that. Maneuverability in tight quarters. The question might be a bit naive sounding but I've never sailed a larger catamaran and I know with the mono's I've sailed many are very different. I would like to feel confident having a boat that I can sail without a motor.
Thanks
jP

[thinwater]

The Santa Maria had no engine.

No, I'm not really trying to be smart. My point is that while some boats may take more attention to sail balance than others, or require different methods, it is always possible. The PDQ is more difficult than some, but raising sails is not hard and I have sailed into my slip (long story).

As for sailing in tight quarters, I've read all the "seamanship" stuff that states the answer to engine failure is to raise a sail. No. First, catamarans have 2 engines, so twin failures are very rare. Second, there is no time unless you were expecting the failure; what is important is getting an anchor down FAST.

[mikeandrebecca]

Not to hijack this thread but I wanted to comment on what Drew said about 2 engine failures. The only way I could see both engines dying at the same time would be a fuel related issue. Has anyone taken any steps to deal with that scenario? For example, a secondary fuel supply/filter.

[thinwater]

I have 3 answers:

1. I have twin Raycors with bowls and have never had to drain water. But I still think they are a fine idea, since I fully expect the elements to last 5 years. The PO had installed a small filter near the fuel tank which I removed (air leak). 1 less thing.
http://sail-delmarva.blogspot.com/2010/ ... -this.html
They are neatly mounted in each engine well, just forward of the engine.

2. I have had twin engine failure, on my delivery trip. The root cause was unrelated failures. On port the prop spun due to age; we were in deep water and the engine simple reved-up. We didn't have a spare (actually we did but hadn't hunted through all of the POs stuff yet) so we soldiered on. The second was a carburetor problem the next day; though it had been running, when we got to the harbor and idled down, it died and would not re-start. The boat had been unused for several years and we had sailed through gale conditions, stirring something up. Needless to say, we were in the marina at the time.
http://sail-delmarva.blogspot.com/2009/ ... ltair.html

3. Failure of anti siphon device on tank. This can cause both engines to starve. This is know to happen on PDQs.

The other possible cause is something in the water, either one of your own lines (saw that happen to another cat) or a fishing gill net (I saw one getting cut loose).

[pfam]

My first thought was that your pdq was called "santa maria"! Right..that Italian who got lost. I've just been really enjoying sailing my small mono without a motor all this year and have become better by leaving it off. This is not aimed at creating any sort of debate that motor-less is better but I just like boats that sail well without a motor. If cruising cats aren't really in this category well, I'd just like to learn that. Hmm not sure if that sounds snobby. I don't mean to be. I'm not really fearful that both motors would fail. I just Want to sail without motors. I like it. I'm in no way a motor hater though. I own a fishing boat and love my F150 Yammy. I love everything that floats...wait...boats that is. My point is I like sailing without motors. Are PDQ's and possibly all cruising cats pretty hard to achieve this? thanks for the replies...I'm learning.

jP

[Page 83]

ACTUALLY, Santa Maria was a PDQ 36, hull number 26. She was the Miami Show boat in 1993. Pablo Escobar bought her. Things didn't work out well for him, and eventually she became Page 83. She still has two engines, but became very adept at running on one for a variety of reasons. With planning and good crew coordination, having only one engine is not inherently dangerous. With no engines she is a bit more difficult to get into a slip than a monohull because she has less mass and less momentum. On the otherhand, she is easier to get moving, for the same reason. Everyone has sailed sunfish or Hobie Cats, or you-name-its without engines, and the rules are no different; they must just be followed with greater care and advance planning. An exceptionally valuable asset is the patience to wait for better conditions. Drop an anchor, have a cup of tea. When the wind dies, Her dinghy can put her into the tightest slip. Heck, you can paddle her in while kneeling on the sterns. Try that with you lead sled!

[pfam]

"Everyone has sailed sunfish or Hobie Cats, or you-name-its without engine"
or a Prindle Cat I might add

Jared Prindle

[mikeandrebecca]

"Everyone has sailed sunfish or Hobie Cats, or you-name-its without engine"
or a Prindle Cat I might add

Jared Prindle

Nope not everyone. We haven't. We started with the PDQ.

[thinwater]

Yup, had a Prindle for 8 years.

Small boats teach sailing, large boats teach systems maintance.

[maxicrom]

Reality Check...

When we bought II the Max (formerly Buckaroo) it had a single diesel in the Port hull - until you were making a few knots it was an absolute nightmare to maneuver in tight places. I first added a bass boat trolling motor to the Stbd. hull - used a pivoting antenna mount so we could drop it when we were docking and later upgraded to a 6hp Torqedo 24v electric outboard.

At least with the single motor we could attempt to maneuver by going really slow. After talking with the previous owner we learned he "only" docked on a mooring and brought fuel to the boat by dinghy - he owned her for 10 years if that tells you anything. Since the outboards are mounted farther forward than the diesel prop (just forward of the rudder post) you may get less of the "spin" factor. By that I mean with the single engine if I tried to manuever while approaching a dock slowly, the boat would begin to go into a 360 spin. Until we added the electric boost motor we became proficient at the aim and slow coast docking procedure - which provides little to no allowance for wind, tide, or evasive action (basically go slow hope and keep a fender at the ready).

On our 36, it would take some real practice to have everything ready to ghost in under sail and depower without issues... not saying it can't be done but even in clear weather approaching a marina on occasion our main has to be coaxed to drop quickly ( a batten hooking on a lazy jack, etc...)

Good luck, but for us I like keeping everything running so we can motor if needed. Worst case the Torqedo can actually move the boat at a few knots.

[Page 83]

Lets go back to the original question, which is interesting; "raising the sails when your not pointed to the wind."
Lets rule out starting from some nice mooring or a dock with room to drift down wind (just to make it hard!)

From dead in the water, Page 83 will turn into the wind with a bare pole and the bimini up. What happens on other PDQs? She will drift astern as the main goes up, but requires a lot of wheel to keep her straight into the wind. With any way on, she will fall off the wind, probably a result of the rudders having some authority. Even with a doubled halyard it takes 5 minutes to crank the main up. If I remember to drop the lazyjacks, they aren't a problem. they hook out of the way under the gooseneck.

From DIW unfurling the jib will get the boat moving, and with any luck she will point a bit into the wind. I would need a football field to tack off a lea shore in light air, and would not attempt it in more than ten knots of breeze. I hope someone else is better at that.

Thank goodness PDQs steer well going backwards. We are not a stranger to that need. Pushing the boom out away from the direction I want to turn will giterdun. Sheeting the jib in first will help blow the bow down to a useable angle to the wind.

Heavy wind conditions introduce significant leeway at low speeds. I should have spent more time practicing in light air!

Is any of this better or worse than a fin keeled monohull? I don't think there's a clear winner anywhere. There's more mass for momentum in a monohull, but the cat will start moving earlier with less sail area to wrestle with. The winner will be the boat with the most convenient controls.

[eepstein]

To add a little more to Page 83's post:

- We have left the mooring ball often without an engine. Its easy to put the main up then unfurl the Genny once moving
- The PDQ is SO much easier to put up the main from drifting than most mono-hulls as it does sail backward quite well. (And I have drifted back on a mooring once with no engine, which was easy - except that you only get one try)
- We also have raised the main quite a few times with the genny already out and moving. As long as the wind is not too strong. As Sandy mentioned, make sure the lazy jacks are down and you are not in a run or broad reach.

But the 'near a lee shore' part is important as PDQs do slip to leeward easily when close hauled. I use my leeward outboard to compensate sometimes. I was thinking that dagger boards would be nice, but after 7 days last week on a Catana 47, I am no longer dreaming of dagger boards.

So yes - I'd say a PDQ has advantages over a big mono-hull when engine-less. But its no day-sailor or Hobie cat, that's for sure.

Eric

[maxicrom]

Eric said the magic word - "mooring ball" - that's not trying to get back into a tight slip - say along the channel of Herrington Harbor North (towards the bridge), or the breakwater and dog leg to Cole's Point on the Potomac...

[Greg]

Eric,
you wrote:
But the 'near a lee shore' part is important as PDQs do slip to leeward easily when close hauled. I use my leeward outboard to compensate sometimes. I was thinking that dagger boards would be nice, but after 7 days last week on a Catana 47, I am no longer dreaming of dagger boards.

What did you find out about the dagger boards you did not like? I do not have experience with them, but thought they would be advantageous.
Thank you,
Greg

[eepstein]

Hi Greg;

I thought they would be too. And in many situations they are, especially close hauled they reduce slipping to leeward.

Here were the problems (in my opinion):
- On a 47' boat, it takes two men to raise and lower the boards, and a third on the helm to take the load off the boards.
- Getting the load off the boards is near impossible in 15 knots or more of wind, at any point of sail, except in irons.
- In a broad reach, with too much board down, the stern seems to want to zigzag and the helm is hard to handle.
- Adjusting the boards to know what settings at different points of sail would take some experience - of which I have little.
- At anchor, and especially in a slip with side currents, the boards bang all night unless they are up.
- At anchor with the boards up the boats sails the mooring/anchor wildly.
- In a slip with the boards up, they still bang in the wind - though not as much.

So basically we felt the effort the manage the boards for the few times they actually add to performance - is not worth the effort - at least on a large boat. Drew may have a lot to add as he had dagger boards for many years.

It did serve to make me feel very good about the mini-keels on our PDQ and not feel the need to complain about the slipping to leeward.

Hope this is useful. The Charter was quite incredible and I enjoyed it fully. Here is the link to the quick video I made. It shows some sailing aspects from a waterproof camera clamped to a boat hook. http://www.youtube.com/user/eepstnet?blend=21&ob=5