Re: [bolger] Safety of ballasted vs. unballasted open boats
- Id like to be in a Chebaco, with a few small, carefully placed water-ballast
tanks built in.
(And wearing an anti-design-altering flame suit)
>you rather be in - an unballasted Chebacco or a ballasted Romilly?
- In a message dated 8/1/00 2:37:24 PM Central Daylight Time,
<< which would
you rather be in - an unballasted Chebacco or a ballasted Romilly?
>>IMHO - I'd rather be in a boat that floats! This advice from someone who
managed to sink a "Bolgeresque" boat in 3' of water not 2 miles for Port
Everglades (or whatever) with two elderly gentlemen aboard and ended up
seriously worried about the likelihood that hypothermia would be a problem.
Bill in MN
- at the risk of beating a dead horse,...
I sailed a completely open boat, a 21' Drascombe Longboat, for 20
years and I would rather weather a gale on her than on most 30
footers that I know of.
She draws 1', is lightly ballasted in the form of a galvanized steel
centerboard and has positive flotation in the form of foam laced
under the seats, but it is her rig that sets her apart. I've never
had to test her floatation even though I've sailed her through storms
in the Chesapeake with a double reefed main and furled jib and mizzen
eating a peanut butter sandwich while most of the big guys scurried
in to harbor (and done other stupid things besides).
In my opinion, the rig contributes most to a boat's seaworthiness,
sail shortening effectiveness being the most important. Next comes
ballast & hull shape. To contrast, I also sailed a Rhodes 19 with a
deep bulb keel when I was growing up, but the shallow, light,
centerboard Drascombe (21' ft) was easily 10 times more able in a
Frank San Miguel