It's not that gang. Never said that I oppose racers going out and crossing oceans in the 'open' class hulls. But I heard something said by a guy who knows one hell of a lot more than I do about boats; Brion Toss this afternoon at a Strictly Sail seminar. He said: "racing sailing is incompatible with good seamanship practices".
And he is right! Racing sailors push their boats to the limit, take risks that would be looked as foolish regarding what a cruising sailor would call “good seamanship practices”. Cruising sailors would always aim to a much bigger safety threshold. A good cruising sailor would not push its boat to the limit. That would not be a good seamanship practice in what regards cruising.
But this has nothing to do with types of boats. Racing is done in all kinds of boats and it seems that also in the Newport 41. This is true for the Newport or true to any other kind of sailboat, regarding racing and cruising. What is acceptable while racing it is not many times acceptable or regarded as good seamanship practice while cruising.
This is the point I am trying to get across to those who think a racing boat can have an interior dropped in it and become an ocean crossing cruiser. The boats that race cross ocean were built in a 'to the limit of strength' and do not have much (if any) safety factor designed into their construction.
This makes no sense. I mean you seem to think that a purposed built ocean racer is more fragile than a cruising boat and that they have a lower safety limit and it is just the opposite.
Ocean racers are built to resist not only those prudent cruising seamanship practices but to be abused over it and to be pushed 100% including over storms where any cruising sailor would have taken survival and comfort tactics. The efforts that these boats where designed to resist are much bigger than the ones a cruising boat is design to resist.
If a sailor use a racing boat as a cruising boat he would always be very far away from the limits that the boat was designed to meet. Some of these Ocean racing boats have done 3 or 4 circumnavigations, including some on the “bad” direction, dozens of Transats and 20 years after being built they are still racing and circumnavigating. There is no cruising boat that have made so many miles and suffered so much abuse, survived so many storms as any of these boats.
But Solo Ocean racers are not only more resistant to efforts than the standard cruiser boat, they have also incorporated safety features that are not normally including in cruisers, like strong crash boxes or sealed air compartments that will make them unthinkable, no matter what. Some of the cruisers that are derived from these boats (for instance the Pogo) have them also.
When you put a cruising interior and a cruising equipment load in one of these boats you drastically reduce the performance of the boat; while you increase the working loads on it. You -could- end up with a boat that neither can out-run a storm or squall (which are regular occurrences) as the hull was designed to do; and a boat that with the cruising load may not survive a storm because it was not designed heavily enough to ride one out either.
I have already said that cruising in a contemporary light boat derived from the Open class solo ocean racers implies a different life style philosophy from the ones that like to cruise a condo or even less comfortable boats but you seem to assume that a solo ocean racer has not a considerable payload for a racing boat and it is quite the opposite.
Think of a mini racer (22ft) for example on their more famous Transat between France and Brazil: they have to carry all the provisions needed to sail from France to Brasil and they also carry much more sails than a cruising boat, and sails are heavy. That is a considerable load for such a small boat, but that is nothing compared with the initial load of one of those that an Italian guy had circumnavigated nonstop. Can you imagine the initial needed load in proportion to the size and weight of the boat?
You are right when you said that the boat would be faster in minimum charge condition but wrong when you say that the boat could be dangerous loaded because was not designed to ride a storm on a loaded condition. It was designed for that:
All boats have a minimum load and a maximum load that are stipulated by the designer and the boat are designed to be sailed safely in each condition and in between. Probably the boat would be safer loaded in between 2/3 and 3/4 of the max load, when the righting moment is bigger and the stability curve in what regards AVS is not much affected, not in its minimum sailing condition.
Open class solo boats were the boats chosen by designers as model to design fast ocean cruiser passage makers precisely because their beam and floatability permits them to carry a considerable load and because their huge initial stability and form stability makes them easy and forgiving boats to sail, even solo. After all they were designed for doing just that: Fast and easy solo sailing (or short crew sailing).