I
t goes without saying that when
choosing a boat, a sailor’s individual
preferences are absolutely pivotal. I
fi rst started sailing in the early
1950s when for offshore cruising
there was an almost obligational
preference for heavy displacement.
At the time this seemed illogical to me
and I have yet to change my mind. In
almost every context heavy means slow
and I wanted to sail fast. Multihulls
attracted me and still do. Yet my current
boat is a monohull displacing 7 tonnes, 4
of which are in the ballast keel. Shindig is
also capable of shipping water ballast. Do
these facts seem contradictory?
Following the light displacement theme,
the truth is that other considerations can
prevail. If speed was the ultimate goal,
then I would sail a multihull. My entry in the
particularly rugged 1970 two-handed
Round Britain and Ireland Race was a 26ft
6in trimaran in which we crossed the line
tenth out of 20 fi nishers. Three Fingered
Jack was the second smallest and by far
the lightest boat in the fl eet and, discomfort
aside, handled the conditions well.Yacht surveyor and designer Andrew Simpson
cruises in his own-design 11.9m (39ft) yacht Shindig.
Read his blog at http://www.offshore-sailor.com
Monthly musingsAndrew Simpson
Choosing a boat
for cruising
Monohull or multihull? Consider where you’d
like to explore and be prepared to compromise
“I must admit, in the
Caribbean and the
Bahamas, a catamaran
might make more sense”However, the problem with trimarans is
that they are a trifl e on the wide side. Yes,
folding designs have been developed –
the 30ft John Westell-designed Ocean
Bird being a notable pioneer of the
concept in the 1970s. But the way in
which structural loads spiral with size was,
and still is, a deterrent against much larger
variable-beam vessels. Folding trimarans
are often intended to
be trailable,
necessitating narrow
centre hulls so the
total three-hull
package stays within
legal width limits on
public roads.
Then, of course, there are catamarans
which usually offer an abundance of
interior volume and whose stability relies
on beam and weight. Back in the late
1960s when we were considering our
options on our next boat, a catamaran to
take us down to the Mediterranean was a
serious contender if it hadn’t been for one
serious downside. Most cruising sailors
must leave their boats occasionally –perhaps even for several months. And
catamarans can be very expensive to
park, with the most attractive destinations
verging on the extortionate. Shindig is
nominally 40ft (12.2m) LOA with a beam
of 12ft 6in (3.81m). A catamaran of similar
length would likely have a beam nearing
20ft (6.1m), meaning it would probably
occupy at least a couple of marina berths,
thereby incurring a corresponding bulge
in the berthing costs. Even if craned
ashore, the space they occupy usually
means owners having to dig deeper into
their pockets.
So, with northern Europe and the
Mediterranean both in mind and no doubt a
little to our own surprise, Chele and I found
ourselves designing and building two
keelboats in succession: fi rst the 30ft 6in
(9.3m) Spook, launched in 1988 and later
Shindig, launched in 2001. Construction of
the fi rst was predominantly of foam
sandwich while the latter had a cedar strip
hull and foam sandwich deck and interior
structure. Both are still in service with the
latter now in the Caribbean.
Which brings me to the central topic of
this article. I believe that when considering
a choice of boat it’s important to view the
wider picture. Both Spook and Shindig
were good choices for European and
Mediterranean waters but, I must admit, in
the Caribbean and the Bahamas, a
catamaran might make more sense.
That’s because there are areas of shallow
water particularly to the western coasts of
the Bahamian islands not exposed to the
scouring effects of the Equatorial Current.
This makes it awkward for fi xed keel
monohulls while a sprightly multihull
would offer plenty of airy and habitable
space along with the liberating benefi ts of
shallow draught. If you want lots of space
a catamaran could be a good start. If not,
how about a modern trimaran?
Which for me
heralds a confession.
Shindig is a worthy
and well-mannered
offshore boat but is
not perfect for the
Caribbean. The
photograph here
shows a 32ft trimaran I designed back in
the late 1970s and I envy its ability to nose
the shore – in this case a sandy beach in
Texas. Under the same circumstances,
Shindig would be anchored off at least a
couple of hundred yards. So, I suppose
the problem is you can’t have it all ways.
Whatever choices we make are going to
involve compromises. But that doesn’t
stop us trying, does it?Shore thing: with a trimaran
you needn’t even get your
feet wet