SailNet Community - View Single Post - Interesting Sailboats
View Single Post
post #3708 of Old 01-28-2013
Jeff_H's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 7,446
Thanks: 11
Thanked 237 Times in 188 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Re: Halberg Rassy 412

Originally Posted by PCP View Post
We are talking about the HR 412? The structural capabilities and rig are suitable for offshore cruising, not “may be”.
Paulo, we are not in disagreement. You are reacting in this case to colloquial English, in which the term 'may be' is intended to acknowledge the "given's" before addressing the contrasting point. The use of the term 'may be' in my sentence was not meant to suggest that the hull, structure and rig of the Halberg Rassey 412 was not structurally suited to offshore.

Originally Posted by PCP View Post
[Regarding outside and inside storage in fact the two cabin version of the 412 offers a much better storage capacity, outside and inside, than any of the only two versions of the 40cc, both 2 cabin versions:
You are right. I was trying to use the contrast in layout between the two and three cabin layout, as an example of why a boat may be capable of going offshore, but not necessarily optimized for going offshore.

Originally Posted by PCP View Post
A boat with a better storage capacity and a boat with a bigger stability is only advertised as a boat that but less emphasis on long-distance cruising for not driving the traditional costumers of the CC boat away. The boat remains in production and that big aft cabin is what many customers want and the CC image is the traditional HR image that is associated with a blue water boat and they don't want to risk that, I mean the image.:
I was not intending to comment on the specifics of how this boat was marketed, but more on how I think that companies should think about their products and market them fairly. My point is that I have no problem with a company building a boat which is clearly biased towards simple coastal cruising in terms of trading off storage for other amenities. My only point is that when a company does that, it needs to be clear in its marketing that this version of the model is not as optimized for offshore cruising as it might be.

Originally Posted by PCP View Post
Here I don’t understand. The boat has offshore bunks (the two bunks in the saloon) and there are solid handholds everywhere:

With regards to the interior images, this is an great example demonstrating a boat which can be taken offshore, vs one that has been optimized for going offshore. When I look at the layout, there should be dedicated seaberths. While its true that leecloths can be added to make a berth function as a seaberth, its a whole lot nicer to actually have berths that are proportioned to sleeping at sea vs developed around the widths needed for seating.

Hand holds should be nearly continous and at a height between 30 or so degrees above and below shoulder height with the arm fully extended. When you look at the span of the table and settees there is not suitable height grab bars. (Ergonomically, overhead handgrips are a dislocated shoulder going somewhere to happen.)

Similarly, ideally for offshore there should be footholds and some form of non-skid on the decking. Shiny varnished cabin soles are a death trap in wet boat shoes and unless the carpet can be held down, so is carpet. Some of the Beneteaus used a neat deck material with small, raised, rubber stipes instead of holly. Like some New Zealand and South African boats that I have seen, a simpler solution is to varnish in 1 cm non-skid strips every 3 cm or so.

Items like ports in the hull, and the comparatively light duty window framing is also suspect in extreme going.

This cabin is has a number or loose lids with finger holes as locker tops on cabinet. That is usually okay for most coastal sailing, but become projectiles offshore and so should have ways to secure the locker and lid. Sliding doors can be made to work offshore, but are not the most reliable solution as well.

The point is not to criticize this particular boat. She looks well constructed and suitable for her intended use. My point that I was trying to make is that there is a next step to optimizing a boat like this for offshore cruising which frankly does not appear to have been done here.

And that goes to the heart of the frequent conversations about the difference between being offshore capable vs what makes an ideal offshore yacht, vs what makes an ideal distance cruiser.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Curmudgeon at Large- and rhinestone in the rough, sailing my Farr 11.6 on the Chesapeake Bay

Last edited by Jeff_H; 01-28-2013 at 01:10 PM.
Jeff_H is online now  
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome