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.
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.
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.
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.
First of all let me tell you that it is nice to have you as one of the contributors of this thread. Yes I agree with you. Halberg-Rassy is just a boat a bit better suited than most for offshore work not a purposely built boat for that and it is not advertised like that, it is more the global opinion regarding the boat that points that way and opinions can be misleading.
It is not a purposely built offshore boat but needs less alterations than a mass production cruiser to be adapted to it. I am not going to enter that discussion here (it has been discussed extensively elsewhere) but it is all about trade offs and compromises. A purposely built boat for offshore would have almost no openings, a small cockpit (even if the transom would be large) and a interior without much free space with lots of holding points, not to mention high stability.
A boat like that would be a very disagreeable boat to live in nice places, at anchor or at the marina. Even the ones that do a lot of voyaging pass 90% of the time in Coastal conditions or at anchor enjoying life so in fact a maximized offshore boat only makes sense for the kind of guys that want to circumnavigate non stop. There are some but they are a tiny minority.
There are in the market some boats more adapted to offshore work than the Halberg-Rassy, boats that are intended for voyaging and most of them are by obvious reasons aluminum boats and one of the better is hanna's boat, the Boreal. But even this one is a compromise and it is not maximized for offshore work. If it was the boat would be gloomy and not agreeable for living, as the Boreal is.
The HR and the XC yachts are just very agreeable boats to live in, made for enjoying life, with a very good stability (way better than the average), boats suited for coastal cruising and also for crossing oceans, boats made for extensive cruising (if one chooses a model with the adequate number of cabins to have storage) but not purposely built offshore boats neither boats designed for cruising in uncharted waters or high latitude sailing.
Regarding sailing in remote places boats like the Boreal, the Allures or the OVNI are better suited and it is not by accident that such an experienced navigator as Jimmy Cornell had chosen an OVNI has its last boat, having tried almost everything in his several circumnavigations:
Even if he said that the OVNI was the best offshore voyage boat that he had sailed I am quite sure if at that time they were available he would prefer a Boreal or an Allures to the OVNI. In fact he says wonders about the Allures.
Both the Allures and the Boreal have a better stability compared to the OVNI. Maybe that's why they are making a new one on OVNI, a boat that is radically different from the traditional line. The boat seems just great. I am very curious about that one
And while Jean Pierre with his boat without a keel waits probably more 12 hours to the 10m waves and 40K winds to clear Biscay, while attempting to make it in 4th place, take a look at the last week of the race and the Kid's victory. This guy is going to make sail even more popular. He is young and cute: French girls have found a new idol.
On the crowd that waits him we can see a bunch of girls with a sheet saying: François marry me!!!
A new boat from Linjett and as all the others beautiful if a bit conservative, fast, stiff, with luxurious interiors and ....expensive. Pity we cannot have it all and cheap.Specifications:
LOA 10.66 m
Waterline length 9.30 m
Width 3.45 m
Draft 1.84 m
Displacement 5.5 t
Ballast 2.2 t
Main 37.0 sqm
Genoa 150% 37.0 sqm
Jib 22.5 sqm
What strikes me about the Linjett, is that appears to be well constructed, nicely finished but with very dated hull form that is loaded with gimmicks like the under deck jib sheets or the power winches which seem out of place on a 'performance cruiser' of this size.
It is also quite heavy for its length and a bit undercanvassed. Looking at the sailing clip, it appears to have adequate stabilty, but is not especially stiff (as naval architects and yacht designers use that term in the States).
Boats like that are a bit of a puzzle. That hullform is something you might expect out of the mid-1980's and there are lots of mid 1980's boats around with similar hullforms (The 35' Wauquiez Pretorien comes to mind). That period was not a highpoint in yacht design. But for whatever the reason, the Linjett used that hull form but has gone through and updated the rig proportion and deck hardware.