# Multihull Popularity and Interesting Designs



## Jeff_H

For quite a while now there has been a huge interest in multihull cruising boats. At recent Annapolis Boat Shows there has been almost an equal area of water devoted to big multihulls as there has been to monohulls. There seems to be an equal number of multihull boat reviews in the major sailing magazines like Cruising World and Sail. 

For some folks, multihulls seem to be the only way to go. For others they hold no appeal. For some on both sides of the mono and multi worldview, this topic is treated with near religious fervor. This thread was created to allow a civil discourse on a broad range of topics related to multihulls. 

Hopefully this thread will provide a place for such topics as: 
-Introduction and discussion of interesting new (or old) Multihull models 
-Perceived 'whys and wherefores' of Multihull popularlity
-Multihull Technical issues 
-Safety and seaworthiness
-Why you like or dislike multihulls
-experiences with Multihulls 
-And other general Multihull related discussions. 

While there are bound to be differences of opinions (and those are welcome within this thread and within SailNet in general), and bound to be some random amounts of thread drift, what will not be tolerated is personal attacks or dismissive comments. 

Respectfully,
Jeff


----------



## smackdaddy

Thank you Jeff! I look forward to this discussion.


----------



## ThereYouAre

I like cats and wish I could afford a fast one. The one thing I generally don't like about them is I don't think they look very good. However I think this one looks great but without standing headroom it's a bit of a non starter.

KD 860


----------



## Minnewaska

Jeff_H said:


> ....At recent Annapolis Boat Shows there has been almost an equal area of water devoted to big multihulls as there has been to monohulls. .....


That's an interesting way to put it. Same area of water would suggest fewer actual models, given the cats footprint. One might even conclude, algebraically, the show was then 2/3rds monos and 1/3 multis.

I guess, I've seen multis there for so long, I didn't take note of a larger presence this past Oct.

Are there any reasonably sized cats with a centerline master berth that you can approach from the side, like a human and not like a dog climbing into it's dog house? I know centerlines don't make good sea berths, but we all spend hundreds of times more nights at anchor than overnight at sea. My current is the first boat I didn't have to climb in from the end and it's a real game changer.


----------



## smj

ThereYouAre said:


> I like cats and wish I could afford a fast one. The one thing I generally don't like about them is I don't think they look very good. However I think this one looks great but without standing headroom it's a bit of a non starter.
> 
> KD 860


I don't have standing headroom in our salon, but then again I'm 6'4" tall. My wife however does









Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

As I've said elsewhere I'm very interested in learning about multis, especially from those who have sailed or are sailing them. We've had a great conversation about them elsewhere. Now that we have this new thread where we _should be able_ to continue that conversation - I'm going to start moving my posts that I think are relevant from that thread to this one.

So pardon the dust...


----------



## smackdaddy

capta said:


> Have you even seen a 70 foot plus cat? Obviously fracking not or you wouldn't make such a ridiculous post. They are about as far from a cruising boat as a mega-motor yacht. They are huge luxurious vessels with circular staircases, galleys for the "real" chef to create gourmet meals, walk in freezers, bars on every deck and most have hot tubs for 8 or ten people. I've never seen any of that on a "cruising" boat, have *you*?
> At 70+ feet you are kinda leaving the "cruising" boat idea for most folks, monohull *or* catamaran. I've seen very very few 65 foot plus family or retired couple cruisers.
> But hey, if you've got the bucks to buy a 70 foot luxury roomaran and go cruise it, then I'll owe you an apology. Otherwise....


You mean like the Privilege Serie 7 or even Serie 8?










I guess I'm trying to figure out how a circular staircase prevents a large catamaran from sailing. Remember, you said that "the husband would miss his sailing".

Here is a 90' Catana crossing the Atlantic...






They certainly seem to be able to sail - even in F8/F9 conditions off the African coast.

So, my post wasn't ridiculous at all. No one has to "miss sailing" on any sailing catamaran no matter the size. I'm not sure which of these boats has the 8-person hot tub - but those can be drained when going to sea - and everything in a gourmet kitchen, walk-in freezer, and even the booze on every deck can be stowed. What would prevent them from sailing?

You certainly don't owe me an apology. But you might want to rethink your position a bit. Your notion of cruising is obviously not everyone's. And there are lots of large cats out there doing what you're saying they can't. Whether you or I can personally afford one or not has nothing to do with it.


----------



## smackdaddy

MarkofSeaLife said:


> It's this type of expensive junk pile that's now for sale at the same price as an oyster 60.
> 
> No wonder oyster went broke!
> 
> https://www.burgessyachts.com/en/sa...ale/sailing-yachts/necker-belle-00000955.html


Holy crap - that's a sobering comparison. Monos are quickly becoming the horse-drawn carriage of yachting.


----------



## smackdaddy

In 2016 multihulls made up almost half of the overall charter fleet...and about 16% of the US imports. Though the imports were down a bit from that previous year, the domestic production of 30'+ multihulls was *up 71%* - and represented *20% of overall domestic production *(now there's some important stats).

I'm not at all surprised people don't see more in their marinas or sailing areas. Multis are clearly growing like crazy at the top of the market - but they haven't yet filtered down into the used market. BUT it's pretty clear the pressures being applied to the new monohull market. Oyster, IP, Hunter, etc - the list will continue to grow while forums continue to obsess over "proper seaberths and handholds".


----------



## smackdaddy

It's funny that this Oyster thread has become a mutlihull thread - but it's actually very fitting if you think about it. As to first-hand experience of the differences in sailing between the two from someone who knows very well, I was going to post these videos in my mutlihull thread before it was unceremoniously locked...for eternity it seems.

I don't think it can be any clearer than this...

Go to around 7:30 and you can see their shakedown cruise conditions and comments by Riley (this is their first real sail with this cat)...






...listen to his comments around 9:00 about the comparison of beating into 25 knots, and look at him and his comfort level and expression. Then continue on to Elayna cooking in these conditions. They talk about he grief they'll catch from chuckleheads about the knives "not being properly stowed"...yet the fruit bowl is perfectly settled.

They aren't even soiling their undies.

Then you have the following video where they talk about the feeling of sailing the cat for a week compared to their old mono at about 12:40...






"How comfortable you can arrive - not exhausted..."

There you go. From those who know. I just don't think there are any arguments left.


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> This either needs some context or additional clarity. US production of sail catamarans are almost nil. Endeavor might still make one or two, and then there is Gemini and Mainecat with a single model each still current. Mainecat has only built a couple of their 38. While they would probably pull out the 41 and 30 molds for anyone who wanted one, I'm not aware of them having sold one in a while. After that, I'm only aware of bespoke builders in the US with very low production - single boats every couple of years.
> 
> So maybe I'm missing some US builders of quantity? Or maybe the few catamarans produced each year in the US does represent 20% of the domestic production - which would speak alarming volumes about US monohull production going down the tubes.
> 
> Mark


Those numbers are from the 2016 Sailing Market Report (which covered up to 2015). I don't know the full context - but at that point wasn't Alpha and Gunboat still going?

The numbers in the report show 36 units of 30'+ multis being built in the US (vs. 21 the previous year) with this notation...



> *Multihulls represented 20% of overall domestic production in 2015 - one in five sailboats built in North America was a multihull


And there were 92 active US builders during that year (a year-over-year decrease from 139 in 2007) - and 70% of those have less than 25 employees.

I think your last point is right on. The domestic boat building market as of 2015 was completely in the toilet - with the only real bright spot being multis (and very small boats holding up). But with Alpha and Gunboat dropping, who knows what the current US multi market is doing now three years later?

That's all I've got right now at my fingertips. You can cross-check these various numbers in the report. I'm too lazy.


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> ...Bavaria and Dufour have now gone that way.


Bavaria's Nautitec 40 Open isn't bad at $500K...










But it's a bit "sensible shoes" to me in the aesthetics department. Not exactly clean and proportional.

What's Dufour coming out with? I saw a website but it seems to be a placeholder.


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> Dufour is in tooling phase and haven't produced a boat yet - just taking orders.
> 
> You know, I'm slowly coming around to this type of aesthetics, and starting to see older designs like a LeRouge as being dated. For sure when this styling first appeared I was appalled, but owning a catamaran changes one to appreciate function over form for living, and these styles come with some great functionality. Even beyond that, I'm coming around to the style itself. I had similar change of opinion on the Euro/Ikea interior styles over the years.
> 
> Besides, there is plenty of room for hating on style in the catamaran market:
> 
> Mark


Is this the LeRouge?










If so, then I'm guilty of preferring dated design (though this is a bit over the top). I had not heard of LeRouge before. Thanks for the reference.

So far, the boat that ticks the boxes for me is the FP Helia 44 - or as I like to call it...the HellYeah!










Everything about this boat is right to me.


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> I appreciate curves, but prefer them in a Schionning or similar. Like I said, I'm coming around to the more hard styling - particularly because it is functional. It begins to look sillier on smaller boats like a Lagoon 39, but stretched out like a HH66 and it is mouth-watering. On the other hand, it is easy to make a large boat look good. I think the Nautitech Open 40 that you posted struck a good balance, but the Bali 4.5 is awful. The new Leopards missed the mark widely, IMO. The Helia is a bit of a compromise with styling between older and newer, but I think they pulled it off OK. There are a few things about that boat that I don't like, but my limited experience with them is that it is a good overall boat.
> 
> But I'm not an architect, or even an architectural enthusiast. I have zero artistic abilities, and no confidence in my opinion in these matters.
> 
> Mark


That's the beauty/curse of architecture...no matter how scientific we try to make the justifications for design, when it comes to aesthetics it's ALWAYS purely subjective. I think that's why architecture is also a dying industry.

In any case so that readers know what we're talking about...

Shionning G-Force 1200









Bali 4.5









Lagoon 39









HH66









Leopard 45









Thanks for bringing up all these great examples. I didn't know about Schionning.


----------



## smackdaddy

The HH48 is not bad either (though not nearly as sexy as the 65)...










What's really interesting to me about it though is the dual steering...with the dual tiller steering outside...










...and the wheel steering inside...










And that "snake pit" in front of the wheel is also an interesting way to get the linework done in a protected space. That was directly from GunBoat wasn't it?

Anyone have pricing info for these?


----------



## smackdaddy

Lazerbrains said:


> And what catamarans have self righted?
> 
> Bueller? Bueller?
> 
> Waiting to see just one that has....think I will be waiting for awhile


None that I know of. Not without significant mechanical help. Here's a good one...






And yet these cats are taking over the sailing market as we've clearly shown.

So, either the sailing world doesn't recognize or share your fears - or your fears are misplaced.

You just have to know how to sail them, Lazer. For example, do you know the story behind the video you posted? Do you know why they went over?


----------



## smackdaddy

Jeez I've got a lot to learn here. I had no freakin' idea there were so many multi builders and brands!

Balance 526


----------



## smackdaddy

outbound said:


> Pictures of the increasing plethora of production cats are of interest to many. To me of more interest is a critique of these offerings beyond simple aesthetics. Would also be quite interested in how to mathematically judge these offerings. Resistance to pitchpoling as is as much an issue as "flipping over", measures of motion in trying conditions and like measurements hold interest. As interesting as they are may I suggest again they do not belong in this thread. Smack as a gentleman I ask you again rather than divert this thread please start another to pursue this interest of yours,mine and I think others. If it's just a picture book I'll glance at it. If substantive I'll follow it closely just like Paulo's.
> To date I think I can summarize your contribution to the OP as "cats have an increasing market share. This hurt Oyster. Here's a bunch of pics of cats I like".
> Your point is made. Move on.
> I think your point is wrong. Oyster moved away from the under 50' market long ago. Those buying the boats in your pictures haven't been the target buyer for Oyster for some years now. Those boats are in the 1/2 to 1 m range. Oysters market is in multiples of that amount. Perhaps those looking in the 1 to 2 m range were a very small segment of targeted Oyster buyers but I seriously doubt that had anything to do with their closure.
> So regardless if one accepts your premise or not the pictures add little or nothing to THIS thread. A thread about multis would be fun. Go for it.


Out, if the mods want to move the discussion Mark and I are having to another thread that's fine with me. I tried to start one specific to multis and it was closed. So don't blame me.

I'm not starting anymore threads here on ComplainNet. I'm done with that. I'm just talking with others about things that interest me as the flow goes.

Your mention about pitchpoling is a good one. I have read a couple of stories about that and vaguely remember one that went over in the Bay of Biscay. I'll see if I can find that story.

The bottom line from what I recall is that you have to treat cats very differently in terms of speed control. For example, AWS is a critical factor - where it's not nearly as much on cruising monos. That's been one of the great things about following the SLV folks. Watching them explain those differences (after having them explained to them by Outremer).

And surfing is far more sketchy on multis - so speed control is far more critical in big conditions from what I've heard. Again, Mark can give much more detail here, and I'd love that kind of info as well.

Here is a 50'er in a tropical storm off Madagascar...






Seems well under control to me.

But here is a Lagoon 52 in 50 knots near Ibiza. This appears to be a new boat to this couple and to my eye they are seriously overpower/overspeeding as their bows are digging in (around 3:30)...






..and you can see that they even start stuffing the bows into the backs of waves in front of them. Not surprising when you see the max speed of 27.2 knots. That's not a controlled boat in my view.

I would seriously be looking at how to slow this boat in these conditions with a drogue or whatever it took. But again, I have no experience sailing these things, so I'm just looking, listening, and learning from those who know.


----------



## smackdaddy

This is a good example of speed control on a cat in heavy weather - see the drogue they're carrying...






They certainly seem relatively comfortable...even in this...



> Cape Town to Brisbane through the Southern Ocean winter on a Leopard39, 64 days non-stop, 65kts+ winds.


Definitely blue water BTW.


----------



## smackdaddy

Another good video of a cat in a serious storm...this time with a sea anchor off the bow...






Survival suits and ready for capsize. Must have been a rough one. Videos after this so he seems to have done okay.


----------



## smackdaddy

As I continue to research I am blown away by the number of videos showing various cats crossing oceans...from the Atlantic to the Pacific to the Southern Ocean. Whoever says cats are just dock queens doesn't seem to have a clue. There's a whole world of mutli sailing going on out there that I certainly wasn't aware of.

These youngish captain and crew certainly seem to be enjoying their crossing on an Outremer 55...






At around 3:00 they show what looks to be the Code 0 furler. That seems to be a *horrible* way to rig it. What's up with that?


----------



## smackdaddy

Here's that C0 furler rigging I was talking about...










That can't be right. I assume that's a dyneema strop - but still.


----------



## smackdaddy

Hey Mark - I was reading about the recent 2018 Boot Dusseldorf in CW and came across this...



> It was all a quite entertaining backdrop for the launch of Bavaria's new C45 and C50 cruising models and its flagship, a stunning 65-footer, all from Cossutti Yacht Design. But Bavaria wasn't the only show in town. Rival German builder Hanse introduced its new 588 and 675, as well as newly styled 388, 348 and 548 models. Look for all of these boats to make their way to shows in the U.S. over the next year, *along with catamarans from Privilège, the French builder that Hanse has acquired. Also new to the multihull scene is Dufour Yachts, which displayed a model of its soon-to-be launched 48-foot catamaran. *The company also introduced its twin-wheel Dufour 360 Grand Large cruising sailboat at the show.


So - ~70' monos are becoming pretty widespread from the major production builders. No wonder Oyster couldn't compete. They were just hour-glassed out of the market. For example, this Solaris 68 is being marketed as a "couples boat":










But it's the bold part that really caught my eye...both German production mono brands are now in the mutli game with Hanse puchasing Privilege...










And Dufor has also jumped in on the French side. Hell, even Discovery Yachts is producing cats in the Bluewater Catamarans line (I'll have to talk with them about that unfortunate name. They obviously are oblivious to the sacredness of the term).

With Beneteau/Jeanneau owning Lagoon it certainly seems there is a seismic shift toward wider boats with more hulls - not just longer boats with "more luxury". And with price points beginning to close between monos and mutlis - I think we're definitely seeing a tipping point.


----------



## smackdaddy

Here's the breakdown of the ARC multi entries:

Outremer - 3
Lagoon - 12
Fountaine-Pajot - 6
Aikane - 1
Catana - 1
Nautitech - 1
Custom - 1
Neel - 1
Unknown - 1
Saona - 1

Mark, is that Saona a brand of it's own? There's also a Saona line of FP boats it seems.


----------



## smackdaddy

That Neel 51 is an interesting boat...


----------



## smackdaddy

SanderO said:


> Again... I see no demand for cats in souther NE... Why? Why is Europe different? Or is mostly the med as opposed to the north sea?


As for general demand, you really should poke around YouTube. I think you'll find a lot of the answers there.

As for Europe, Med, Carib, etc. - Mark has already pointed out - and I have presented market data - that clearly shows demand for cats is driving the huge shift in the new boats being built/purchased to meet that charter demand. And as Mark has also pointed out - you have years of waiting lists for new cats. You don't for monos.

So, I don't think there is any one single "why". Cats are just generally more attractive all-round sailing platforms than monos. I think that's becoming very evident and somewhat inarguable. And now that they are becoming more affordable there's really no turning back. Where the ratio will settle? Who knows? But I definitely don't think that shift is anywhere near settled yet.


----------



## smackdaddy

Agreed Mark. I wouldn't choose fiberglass if my concentration was going to be be high-lats - although I wouldn't necessarily be afraid of passing through high-lats in a glass boat if I was confident in her. That video I posted earlier of that Leopard's (?) run from Cape Town to Oz was impressive. And _Sequitur_ will always stand as a great example on the mono side.

So, as you say, it comes down to what you're doing with the boat. I sure as hell wouldn't want an alum "expedition" boat in the Med or Carib. And I also wouldn't buy a cat if I wasn't going to be sailing mostly full time. It makes no sense to me to dump that much money into just keeping a boat at the dock. I think you have to be sailing it for it to make any sense whatsoever financially.

As for learning - I'm honestly changing my outlook there too. Instead of dinghy sailing - I want my boys to keep learning on our beachcat, _Fiasco_. First, it's SO much more fun and fast than even a J24 - and second, I think you learn a lot more critical aspects of control than you do with a dinghy. You're always on that line of going over unless you balance everything just right. I love that. It's way gnarlier than dipping a rail. And flying a hull is about as fun as it gets - except on a cruising cat.


----------



## smackdaddy

Sal Paradise said:


> Slightly different take on it - I like sailing, motorcycling, and flying. All three involve a tri axial motion, a balancing of forces, a poetry of motion where my skill translates into this equation. It is not so much about burying the rail as it is that.
> 
> That said, I'd rather be sailing a cat some day than not sailing.


We're a lot alike then. And I'd suggest...you need one of these...










Or better yet...one of these...


----------



## smackdaddy

Holy crap!!!! 40 knots?!?!?!?!










You win.


----------



## smackdaddy

Now this is an interesting reflection of this discussion about monos and multis. Though I'm not a fan of their video series, Paul and Sheryl Shard of Distant Shores have over 100K miles sailing and living aboard since the '80s. Their first boat was a Classic 37 that took a complete refit...










Then came a Southerly 42...










Then a Southerly 49...










Then a new Southerly/Discovery* 48 (which has the Hunter arch by the way - nice)...










*Now, for the tie-in. Discovery bought Southerly - so another mono builder bites the dust. But Discovery also has the Bluewater Catamaran brand.










And when you think about the sailing abilities of and approaches to these two boat types - it actually makes a lot of sense for Discovery to have these two lines of boats.

Here is this couple covering an Atlantic crossing on a Bluewater 50...






The first 8 seconds gives you a very good idea of how stable these cats are in big seas. But let's evaluate its seaworthiness based on past discussions of what it takes to survive out there...

1:42 - Oh boy, Capta will love the fact that this particular "roomaran" has the hot tub! No circular staircase though.
2:18 - Not just in-hull portlights - but freakin' picture windows! Death.
2:26+ - ZERO proper seaberths - death.
2:33 - HEATED TOWEL RACKS IN THE HEAD? WTH?!?!?!
2:38 - Angry sea ready and waiting to bust out those in-hull lights and kill everyone inside. Death.
2:50 - Dual headsails - good. In-mast main - death.
2:57 - Swept-back spreaders and no backstay - death and dismasting.
5:18+ - Interior tour of the last thing you'll ever see before dying. NO PROPER SEABERTHS!
8:42+ - Exterior tour of what will be underwater when she fails to right herself and breaks the deal!
9:15 - Hot tub baby!
9:50+ - Selling their stuff.

And here is the footage of the boat failing and everyone dying...






It's hard to watch...

1:48 - You can see where the boat was already falling apart. A bad omen.
3:53 - You can see the diamond stays and swept-back spreaders - with no backstay. Did they rip off Hunter? This mast will NEVER make it across the Atlantic - or at least the main will be in tatters.
5:39 - Where are the fiddles on those countertops? And why are you people strapped into the galley?
7:03 - They haul in a nice catch for dinner. A dirty filter.
8:24 - More boring cooking - no Flying Chefs.
9:00 - The boat begins to sink and everyone tries to figure out how to staunch the flow of water. Panic sets in...and the lady eats another cinnamon roll.
9:50 - They ignore the emergency have steak and wine as they await their fate. No one is even holding onto the wine bottle to keep it from falling over!?!?!
10:12 - Drunk on wine as the boat sinks, they put the assym up - hoping to make Tortola before they slip beneath the waves.

Oh good lord there looks to be 3 of these videos. Let's just jump the end to see they went down...






1:50 - He gives an overview of the boat (a 50'er designed for couples).
3:16 - Cake. With seagull crap on it. And stuff all over the counters - unsecured - AT SEA!?!?!
4:05 - Very dangerous galley protocol. The pan isn't even in the tongs!
4:15 - Good lord they cooked the poodle. It must getting bad.
7:39 - Still waiting for the F12 storm. You know it's coming.
7:55 - Dude talks about out of 8 crossings, this is the lightest wind ever...proving that catamarans are safer.
8:40 - A look at the nav station as alarms are sounding all over the place with that water streaming in from the cheap escape hatch.
9:26 - The galley at night. He's barely able to stand up from the horrible motion of the catamaran.
10:00 - He brags about the battery bank and everything being able to be run off AC inverters. And 3 fridge-freezers. What couple needs that at sea when your fighting for your lives?
10:20 - He points out the obvious ridiculousness of standard, comfortably living room chairs on a proper ocean going vessel.
11:57 - Finally the F12 comes. Oh never mind.
12:50 - The seas come up at least. And that lady is still nonchalantly cooking like she's on a cat or something!
13:32 - Finally the boobies come out!

Wait - LANDFALL!?!?! It's only been 21 days and no one is dead!! They're just fatter and more well-rested!?!?! How can that be?!?!? Have they never heard of SN?

What a let down.

PS - You can compare this crossing with their other videos on their Southerly's. I'll take the Bluewater, thanks.


----------



## smackdaddy

And on the other end of the spectrum - here's how to break a cat...even while "coastal cruising"...






..put up all the canvass possible in very strong winds and crank everything down as tight as you can. Oh SNAP!

I honestly think they were flying that windward hull. No joke. I have a very strong hunch these guys were mono sailors and had no clue what they were doing.

"Hold my beer and let's dip a rail!"

Unbelievable. Even so, the boat kept them safe. And they have 2 engines to get them home.


----------



## smackdaddy

Here is a great summation of cat vs. mono ocean sailing from a delivery/crew guy who had only done passages on monos before taking this Outremer 45 across.






More substantiation of what I've been hearing from most who do passages on these boats after sailing monos. And I don't even think Outremer paid this guy off.

BTW - the guy is Ryan Helling. And to show that he knows a thing or two about offshore sailing and racing...



> In the 2006 and 2012 Vic-Maui races I crewed on the Santa Cruz 52 VOODOO CHILD and J/145 DOUBLE TAKE, in both races we won line honors and took first overall trophies.


----------



## smackdaddy

Thank you Chall - I believe I will...

Here's an interesting look at very similar sea-states and how a cat and mono handle them while crossing the Atlantic. Both use very similar dual headsails..

A Lagoon 440...





And a Beneteau O46 (with an ex-VOR racer)


----------



## smackdaddy

This new video just came out from SLV. It's a fantastic example of *2 people* sailing an Outremer 45 in all kinds of conditions. See for yourself...






I honestly think there is a significant safety factor on cats simply in the crew not being as stressed or fatigued on passages (lack of sleep always takes its toll, yes - but the levels are way lower here). Look at her interview at about 4:25 as for what the boat is like in rough seas.

Another important factor in this is that these two are still learning how to sail this 45' cat. And the boat is doing very, very well to meet them and keep them safe...pretty easily actually. Riley's email at 11:15 talks about their hitting _22 knots!_ surfing (though he talks earlier about why he wasn't concerned with it), and a mild gybe at 17 knots - with him asking Outremer's advice on boat/sail handling at these speeds. Basically, he's saying the boat has handled it well and he hasn't been concerned - and just wonders if he should be. It will be great to hear back what he is told. This is really good stuff.

And this is why I'm going cat. No-brainer.


----------



## smackdaddy

There we go. I think that was most of my part of the multi conversation from the Oyster thread. I deleted all my posts there as I move them here. So, although it's a bummer that it's only half the conversation, I trust everyone is now pleased and we can get back to discussing the coolest boats on the ocean as far as I'm concerned.

Goodnight.


----------



## aeventyr60

As promised, two pictures of the cats I'm playing with.. A Prout 38 and a Lagoon 38. Of course a proper sea going boat in the background....


----------



## overbored

I have sailed and raced beach cats all my life. The first big cat I sailed on was Polynesian Concept with Buddy Ebsen and then several more but I just can't relax when the sheets are cleated off. I have been on several monos when the mast head has touched the water and never even gave it a second thought. they always came back up and got us home.
Pacific Northwest Boating News: UPDATE: PNW sailors rescued after capsize in Caribbean 600 race | Three Sheets Northwest


----------



## Minnewaska

Minnewaska said:


> .....Are there any reasonably sized cats with a centerline master berth that you can approach from the side, like a human and not like a dog climbing into it's dog house? I know centerlines don't make good sea berths, but we all spend hundreds of times more nights at anchor than overnight at sea. My current is the first boat I didn't have to climb in from the end and it's a real game changer.


Geesh, feels like a DDoS attack of posts above. Was that necessary?

I'm reposting my query above, as it's been buried underneath a pile of dust. I think a reasonably sized cat would be 50ft or less. Not many couples cruising anything bigger than that.


----------



## gonecrusin

We'll stick with our 45 year old mono for the following reasons; speed, soft ride, load carrying capability and self rescue feature of a ballasted hull. My wife does not like the motion of multi's and while I like some of the big cats I'm afraid our sailing style would lead us to a Leopard sort of ending.


----------



## SanderO

My hunch is the biggest driver for the interest in cats is the real estate and the lack of heeling which appeals to the high heeled ladies. Many others "rationalize" the benefits. That's OK.


----------



## colemj

Minnewaska said:


> Geesh, feels like a DDoS attack of posts above. Was that necessary?
> 
> I'm reposting my query above, as it's been buried underneath a pile of dust. I think a reasonably sized cat would be 50ft or less. Not many couples cruising anything bigger than that.


Since the OP created such a broad topic of a thread, it could go anywhere. The above posts were moved out of the Oyster thread and into this one - just as several people demanded in the Oyster thread (you may have been one of those) - it wasn't an attempt to bury your specific post, as anyone reasonable could see.

To answer your question, yes, there are centerline berths in catamarans <50'. Many of the production cats have these, as a simple google search can provide. However, to get this, the hulls have to be pretty beamy - which is not a good thing for catamaran performance.

Large centerline berths make excellent sea berths on catamarans because there is no healing and little rolling. We sleep very well in our standard queen sized berths during passages, although they are not centerline. Being centerline wouldn't change anything in this regard.

Mark


----------



## colemj

Jeff_H said:


> Hopefully this thread will provide a place for such topics as:
> -Introduction and discussion of interesting new (or old) Multihull models
> -Perceived 'whys and wherefores' of Multihull popularlity
> -Multihull Technical issues
> -Safety and seaworthiness
> -Why you like or dislike multihulls
> -experiences with Multihulls
> -And other general Multihull related discussions.


Man, this thread is going to go everywhere. Seems like it should be a forum topic, and the listed items examples of possible threads within that forum.

Mark


----------



## smj

SanderO said:


> My hunch is the biggest driver for the interest in cats is the real estate and the lack of heeling which appeals to the high heeled ladies. Many others "rationalize" the benefits. That's OK.


You mean the benefits such as 
unsinkability ( for most but not all catamarans)
Seaworthiness 
Performance
Shallow draft
Lack of heel, which is enjoyed by not only the high heeled ladies
Lack of rolling in an anchorage
Lack of rolling in your typical downwind circumnavigation. (I hate having chafe spots on my ears from sleeping)
Redundancy ( 2 engines, 2 rudders)
Great view of your surroundings from the salon
Not having to strap yourself into the galley 
Reaching your destination feeling refreshed and not like you went 5 rounds with Mike Tyson
And yes, the wife may actually go sailing with you

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

SanderO said:


> My hunch is the biggest driver for the interest in cats is the real estate and the lack of heeling which appeals to the high heeled ladies. Many others "rationalize" the benefits. That's OK.


Interesting reply with seemingly no self-examination with regards to "rationalizing" the benefits of monos, or "rationalizing" the downsides of catamarans. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 
But that's OK.

Mark


----------



## Arcb

Was reading another big performance cruising cat capsized recently.

https://www.sail-world.com/news/202264/Fujin-crew-rescued-in-RORC-Caribbean-600


----------



## colemj

It is good to have perspective on these things. While the manufacturer called it a "performance cruiser", it was designed and built as an all-out racing boat. It was a foiling boat built light with a huge sail plan and only a minimalist interior (its main cabin is just a small doghouse). It was crewed by professional racers, and built for campaigning in races.

Likewise, the Sig 45 and many other performance boats should not be considered "cruising cats", even though they are marketed this way.

In a similar vein, the Pogo 36 is marketed as a cruising monohull, but I bet most here wouldn't consider it such.

Mark


----------



## colemj

Here is another keel lost off a cruising monohull: Keel Failure off the Canary Islands >> Scuttlebutt Sailing News

Seems like this so common as to be a real concern: Keeping Keels Attached in the Future >> Scuttlebutt Sailing News

From the article: _"Stan Honey, chairman of the Oceanic and Offshore Committee at World Sailing, is excited. Too many boats are losing their keels, and he is eager to share some of the progress being made to reverse this trend."_

Mark


----------



## Arcb

colemj said:


> It is good to have perspective on these things. While the manufacturer called it a "performance cruiser", it was designed and built as an all-out racing boat. It was a foiling boat built light with a huge sail plan and only a minimalist interior (its main cabin is just a small doghouse). It was crewed by professional racers, and built for campaigning in races.
> 
> Likewise, the Sig 45 and many other performance boats should not be considered "cruising cats", even though they are marketed this way.
> 
> In a similar vein, the Pogo 36 is marketed as a cruising monohull, but I bet most here wouldn't consider it such.
> 
> Mark


No doubt, we need to be wary of the marketing material in circulation. It can not and should not be accepted at face value. Questioning marketing material makes sense. Accepting marketing material at face value without questioning it, could very well result in being upside down in a 53 foot catamaran.


----------



## ThereYouAre

Minnewaska said:


> Geesh, feels like a DDoS attack of posts above. Was that necessary?
> 
> I'm reposting my query above, as it's been buried underneath a pile of dust. I think a reasonably sized cat would be 50ft or less. Not many couples cruising anything bigger than that.


I thought that was fairly common in most 40' cats. Here is a 40' FP Lucia, does it meet your requirements.


----------



## ThereYouAre

SanderO said:


> My hunch is the biggest driver for the interest in cats is the real estate and the lack of heeling which appeals to the high heeled ladies. Many others "rationalize" the benefits. That's OK.


The living space is attractive, as is a saloon with 360 degree views. But the nicest part for me is the potential to do 20+ knots (even if the reality is that your average cruising speed won't be much higher than a mono).

My ideal boat would be a 30' trimaran with the interior of a Tardis nerd).


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> Accepting marketing material at face value without questioning it, could very well result in being upside down in a 53 foot catamaran.


Or on the seafloor in a 82' monohull. Or a 45' mono. Or a ....

On the other hand, this boat was being pushed to its extremes by a professional racing crew in a professional race event with sporting conditions. It was a new design with no previous sailing experience and the crew did not know its limits.

In the same situation, it is possible an under-rigged, heavy, fat cruising catamaran could be flipped.

So this may very well represent a safe performance cruising catamaran like any others of its ilk. It is not my cup of tea, and its reputation may be ruined now, but it still could fit the marketing bill.

Mark


----------



## colemj

ThereYouAre said:


> But the nicest part for me is the potential to do 20+ knots (even if the reality is that your average cruising speed won't be much higher than a mono).


The reality for even performance cruising catamarans of modest size is that any 20+kt achievements will be few and far between, and likely only because it is being pushed beyond safety. All of the youtube postings are more about singular instantaneous speeds surfing down waves than average speeds, or even regular occurrences.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> The reality for even performance cruising catamarans of modest size is that any 20+kt achievements will be few and far between, and likely only because it is being pushed beyond safety. All of the youtube postings are more about singular instantaneous speeds surfing down waves than average speeds, or even regular occurrences.
> 
> Mark


This holds for virtually all the videos I've seen. For speeds like this they are either in storms and/or way over-canvassed. I'd posted a video in my original thread of a 50+ footer hitting mid-to-high 20s and they were stuffing their bows. I'll try to find that one again. It's scary.


----------



## ThereYouAre

While doing 20+ knots is on the extreme end I still think regularly going 10+ knots in my 32' live aboard cruiser leaving much larger monohulls in my wake would put a big grin on my face.

Sailing Catamarans - Eclipse - 9.9m performance cruiser

Are there any production cats similar to this Richard Woods design?


----------



## Arcb

colemj said:


> Or on the seafloor in a 82' monohull. Or a 45' mono. Or a ....


I know we have been over this before, but you know that I neither own, nor particularly care for keel boats right? I wasn't making any comparisons to mono hull keel boats.

The article as much as anything demonstrates differences in multi hulls. One can't lump "catamarans" all in one basket. A lumbering charter cat may have as little in common with a high performance cruising cat as a full keeled double ended mono has with a light fin keeled high aspect broad sterned racing mono.

I know you probably are aware of this, but I am not sure every one makes that distinction.


----------



## Arcb

ThereYouAre said:


> While doing 20+ knots is on the extreme end I still think regularly going 10+ knots in my 32' live aboard cruiser leaving much larger monohulls in my wake would put a big grin on my face.
> 
> Sailing Catamarans - Eclipse - 9.9m performance cruiser
> 
> Are there any production cats similar to this Richard Woods design?


Tomcats maybe?

https://www.sailmagazine.com/boats/tomcat-970s


----------



## smackdaddy

I wanted to circle back around to this apparent fear of capsize. I've already posted above the video of the capsize of the G4. There's no question that boat capsized and it didn't come back up on its own.

Arc just posted another example of this catamaran that also capsized and didn't come back up...



















But so that you understand some context about both of these boats, it is made very clear in the G4 video that the professional skipper and crew were intentionally pushing that boat on foils to see what it would do. It is also clear (visually and confirmed by the skipper) that the reason the boat went over is that they had a problem releasing the mainsheet. If you have any time at all on a beachcat you understand how this can be a real issue.

As for the _FUJIN_, the Bieker 53, she was also racing in the RORC Caribbean 600. And to give you some context of how hard this crew pushes this boat, here you go...










So, it's pretty clear to anyone with an open mind that neither of these boats/use-cases have anything whatsoever in common with cruising. So to use them as examples of what can happen to a cruising mutli is a bit like using DRUM or CHEEKI RAFIKI or even VIRBAC PAPREC 3 to say that you should fear cruising monos. There's just no logical correlation if you're at all serious about the subject.

On the other hand you have LEOPARD in the video posted elsewhere...






Again, definitely a cruising cat (Chris White Design)...and definitely upside down. Now, I think this was posted earlier, but here is a superb write-up by Charlie Doane on the incident...

https://www.sailfeed.com/2016/11/atlantic-57-capsize-more-details-on-the-fate-of-leopard/

A critical part of that article is this...



> Chris White has already received a preliminary meteorological assessment from Jennifer Francis, a research professor at Rutgers University (also a friend and an Atlantic catamaran owner), who reviewed the atmospheric records for the relevant time and place and concluded conditions in the area were in fact conducive to the formation of a tornadic vortex.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Graphic prepared by Jennifer Francis. Her conclusion, transmitted to Chris White: "It all seems to add up to a twisting phenomenon, not a microburst."
> 
> Discussing the event with Charles Nethersole, it really did sound to me like the purest piece of bad luck a bluewater sailor could ever hope to encounter, as though God himself, with no warning, had suddenly decided to poke you with a finger and squash you like a bug.


So to call this event a "squall" is pretty far off the mark. You can read through the rest of the thread and draw your own conclusion.

BUT - there is another issue here that IS of some concern...a second Chris White Design ANNA also capsized in what was reported as a "squall" several years earlier...

https://www.chriswhitedesigns.com/what-we-can-learn-from-anna-s-capsize-by-chris-white



> The report from Anna was the squall did not look any different than the others. But the last wind reading they noticed was 62 knots. That's a lot of wind. And they had the same sail up as Javelin did in the squall I just mentioned, a single reefed main and the full self tacking jib. Keep in mind that power in the wind increases as the square of the velocity. Doubling the velocity from 20 to 40 kts increases the pressure on the sails by FOUR times. Tripling the wind velocity from 20 to 60 kts increases the wind pressure by NINE times.
> 
> Reefing not only reduces the sail area but removes sail area from up high where the wind pressure exerts the most leverage trying to turn the boat over. The typical catamaran mainsail is large with a very rounded roach that increases the sail area near the top of the sail where it exerts the most heeling force. The combination of both reducing the sail area and reducing its height by reefing has a dramatic effect on stability, allowing the boat to stand up to much stronger gusts.


So LEOPARD in the video above is the *second *CWD that has capsized in high winds. Why? The ANNA story seems to clearly be on the sailors having too much sail up. And Chris White himself agrees with the tornadic weather conclusion above regarding LEOPARD...



> It is still early in our evaluation of what happened but my own opinion is that Leopard was overtaken by a tornadic waterspout.


But *two* CWDs going over? Is there something in the design/build of these boats that make them more prone to capsize?

Regardless, I'm not at all worried about it. I know it can happen. I also know keels do fall off. That's why you take care of the boat and sail her to conditions...regardless of what boat you're on. It's really no frightening mystery.


----------



## smackdaddy

I am glad to have discovered another North American mutli brand with Beiker (thanks for that Arc)...

Bieker Boats









Seeing those market numbers made me wonder who and where the hell these builders are.


----------



## smackdaddy

​


colemj said:


> Man, this thread is going to go everywhere. Seems like it should be a forum topic, and the listed items examples of possible threads within that forum.
> 
> Mark


That would be cool. The market is definitely speaking. And it would help give SN a unique flavor in relation to other sailing forums - one that it really needs right now.


----------



## Minnewaska

colemj said:


> ..... it wasn't an attempt to bury your specific post, as anyone reasonable could see.


I didn't think they were intended to bury my post, rather it was a consequence of all the cutting and pasting. I also don't think anyone reasonable would have thought I was suggesting otherwise. It still seems unnecessary to have done so, after we've seen them all already. This is a forum discussion, not an encyclopedia.



> To answer your question, yes, there are centerline berths in catamarans <50'. Many of the production cats have these, as a simple google search can provide. However, to get this, the hulls have to be pretty beamy - which is not a good thing for catamaran performance.
> 
> Large centerline berths make excellent sea berths on catamarans because there is no healing and little rolling. We sleep very well in our standard queen sized berths during passages, although they are not centerline. Being centerline wouldn't change anything in this regard.


My thanks to the poster below for actually giving an example. Seems less room to the side of a queen berth in a multi is to be expected. Heads and showers are usually roomier, it seems.


----------



## gonecrusin

How about this cruising cat? It doesn't appear to be holed, it's not a racer, it's a charter condo cat. It certainly wasn't safe for the sailors aboard even though it floated, they're missing.










https://www.enca.com/south-africa/missing-sunsail-found-agulhas


----------



## gonecrusin

What about this condo cat? The boat floated but the sailors are missing.










December 18, 2006


----------



## smj

gonecrusin said:


> How about this cruising cat? It doesn't appear to be holed, it's not a racer, it's a charter condo cat. It certainly wasn't safe for the sailors aboard even though it floated, they're missing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.enca.com/south-africa/missing-sunsail-found-agulhas


Amazing isn't it? That's a picture of the cat floating a year after it flipped. Now since you have about as much of a chance for a cruising cat to capsize as you do a monohull sink.....Those hulls look to be quite possibly livable and that's a much easier target for rescuers to locate than a life raft.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## gonecrusin

smj said:


> Amazing isn't it? That's a picture of the cat floating a year after it flipped. Now since you have about as much of a chance for a cruising cat to capsize as you do a monohull sink.....Those hulls look to be quite possibly livable and that's a much easier target for rescuers to locate than a life raft.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


You obviously didn't read the article. All hands were lost.


----------



## smj

gonecrusin said:


> You obviously didn't read the article. All hands were lost.


Yes, I read about it when it happened. They went through a tropical cyclone, possibly fell of the boat when it capsized, could have lived on it for some amount of time but eventually perished, could have even been shortsighted enough to get in a life raft, who knows. I do love the fact that an overweight charter boat is able to float so high in the water, even after a year.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> The reality for even performance cruising catamarans of modest size is that any 20+kt achievements will be few and far between, and likely only because it is being pushed beyond safety. All of the youtube postings are more about singular instantaneous speeds surfing down waves than average speeds, or even regular occurrences.
> 
> Mark


This is a very, very important point - against what I personally think is a serious misconception by people who have never sailed a cat.

So, Mark, correct me if I'm wrong, but let me lay out why I think this misconception about multihulls and speed can be deadly...

Your exchange above shows a very interesting notion about the kinds of speeds cruising cats "can achieve". As you point out - this is not the kind of speed you'd ever sustain. But more to the point, *you really would not want to*. It is here that capsize and pitchpole start to become a real possibility. Let's look at an example...

In post #18 above, I linked in a video of a new Lagoon 52 (undoubtedly a cruising cat) in fairly intense gale (F9+). Now, just the thumbnail for this video below shows the immediate problem...this boat is hitting speeds of 27+ knots!










But here is the more critical underlying problem in this scenario...










This is a new boat for this couple. But they seem to be clueless as to the danger they are slipping into. To them, they are "breaking speed records" (back to the exchange in the SN post above.). But in reality, look at what is happening to these bows as they are doing this...



















In this sequence that port bow in under water for a full 4 seconds! Just insane.










And now BOTH hulls are digging in.

In the midst of all this you can see the woman with a very concerned look on her face. The guys seem oblivious. Her gut is telling her something - as is mine.

Now, I've personally never sailed a *cruising* cat. But I have sailed the BFS Flagship FIASCO!










And when I start seeing rooster tails coming off the bows, I slow the hell down. Immediately. Because you only have to go through a pitchpole or two to understand that its not something that you want to do.

This is why, as I've read many times and places, drogues/warps are a very good thing on multihulls. When you're stuffing the bows of a *52' footer*, you don't just sit inside and talk about the records your breaking. You put out something to slow you the hell down. Otherwise instead of "breaking records" - you're simply on your way to becoming a statistic.

Mark, smj, PDQ, others who know - what say ye? Are these guys flirting with disaster as much as I think they are?


----------



## smackdaddy

gonecrusin said:


> What about this condo cat? The boat floated but the sailors are missing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> December 18, 2006


I don't know where you're trying to go with this...but what about these?










Hurricanes kill boats of all kinds. So stay away from them. What's new?


----------



## Capt Len

So ,the adrenaline rush ,just before you flip is what some seem to seak. They other end of wha th? is the charter cats in Thailand doing the goof on the reef. FRom our view point veranda we watch rented or skippered cats dance with rocks on the beach and anchor in secure crowds where it dries at low tide. Entertaining .


----------



## Arcb

I dont normally look at these cruising links, but 27 knots in a Lagoon got my attention. It was hard to tell in the vid where everybody was when, I couldnt tell if they were surfing over 20 kn in auto pilot or in hand. Doing those speeds in a cruising cat in autopilot would be pretty dumb, broaching at that speed could be catastrophic, a skilled helmsman might be able to pull a boat out of a broach at that speed, but an autopilot, not likely. Even in hand steering it looks really risky to me, dont think those lagoons were designed for planing speeds.


----------



## gonecrusin

smj said:


> Yes, I read about it when it happened. They went through a tropical cyclone, possibly fell of the boat when it capsized, could have lived on it for some amount of time but eventually perished, could have even been shortsighted enough to get in a life raft, who knows. I do love the fact that an overweight charter boat is able to float so high in the water, even after a year.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Nope, just rough weather. Doesn't take much to make them invert.

And it's great that it's floating high for the boat, not so good for the sailors. You sell false security when you sell "how high it floats".


----------



## gonecrusin

smackdaddy said:


> I don't know where you're trying to go with this...but what about these?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hurricanes kill boats of all kinds. So stay away from them. What's new?


Wrong Smack, no hurricane made the one on the west coast flip, just rough weather.

You love to obfuscate.


----------



## smj

gonecrusin said:


> Nope, just rough weather. Doesn't take much to make them invert.
> 
> And it's great that it's floating high for the boat, not so good for the sailors. You sell false security when you sell "how high it floats".


It's obvious you know nothing of the incident and even more obvious you know absolutely nothing about catamarans. Enjoy whatever you sail and I hope it treats you well.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

gonecrusin said:


> Wrong Smack, no hurricane made the one on the west coast flip, just rough weather.
> 
> You love to obfuscate.


Okay...here is a snippet from the article you yourself posted...



> Not much else is known at this point, other than the fact that the area near Cape Blanco was pummeled by 80 knot winds last week and that it's unlikely we will ever know exactly what happened or why the boat didn't seek shelter in the face of severe weather forecasts.


Look up 80 knots in the Beaufort Scale and tell me what you see.

Here is another snippet from another article that has a bit more detail...



> The morning of Dec. 11, the forecast issued by the National Weather Service for the coastal waters between Florence and Cape Blanco, the area north of Cat Shot's last recorded position, included a storm warning, a warning about hazardous seas, and winds predicted from the south at 50 knots, with gusts to 65 knots. Wind waves were to reach 12 to 15 feet, running into a west swell of 19 feet.
> 
> "Waves with a long fetch from the south intersecting with large westerly swells can lead to wave super-positioning," says Sven Nelaimischkies, meteorologist of the marine program at the Medford, Ore., weather station. "If this happens, 15-foot waves can build to 45 feet or more."
> 
> A month earlier, on Nov. 12, the 440-foot container ship Westwood Pomona was hit by a rogue wave in the same waters, a little farther offshore. The Associated Press reported that a 70-foot wave smashed several windows of the command bridge, injured one crewman, and damaged the ship's primary electronics, forcing it to put into Coos Bay, Ore., for repairs.


F10-11 winds - but absolutely monstrous waves.

Where exactly is the obfuscation? In any case, there is already a thread for the kind of capsize stuff you're posting. Why don't you go post it in there?


----------



## smackdaddy

Arcb said:


> I dont normally look at these cruising links, but 27 knots in a Lagoon got my attention. It was hard to tell in the vid where everybody was when, I couldnt tell if they were surfing over 20 kn in auto pilot or in hand. Doing those speeds in a cruising cat in autopilot would be pretty dumb, broaching at that speed could be catastrophic, a skilled helmsman might be able to pull a boat out of a broach at that speed, but an autopilot, not likely. Even in hand steering it looks really risky to me, dont think those lagoons were designed for planing speeds.


Watching through the video it appears they were on AP.


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> Watching through the video it appears they were on AP.


If I remember correctly they had a hired captain and crew with them. Doesn't mean they weren't on autopilot though.


----------



## Arcb

I agree, it did look that way (like they were on auto). There was the young guy sitting at the nav station. I wonder if there might be a joystick or an autopilot control there with dodges, yaw controls, auto over ride etc. Not the same as having somebody at the wheel but maybe enough to pull the boat out of a broach. It would be interesting to know.


----------



## smackdaddy

Here is the answer to this question in the comments...



> Lagoon Greatcircle
> Lagoon Greatcircle
> 2 weeks ago
> We were on autopilot all the time. It seems to work great...﻿


----------



## smackdaddy

Look at the interior of this Neel 45 tri...






Just mindblowing to me.


----------



## Arcb

Sure, but on autopilot can mean a lot of different things. Were they in the salon watching reruns of gilligans island on autopilot, or did they have someone standing by the over ride. Surfing at 27 knots in a cruising cat, they would be pretty foolish not to have somebody keeping a close eye on things, whether they were lucky enough to survive or not.

https://ww2.bandg.com/product/triton2-autopilot-controller/


----------



## smackdaddy

In one of these threads I remember our discussion about swept-back spreaders being a major problem for extended passages - not really "blue water" worthy.

Well, above I posted a couple of videos from the Distant Shores TV people who took a Bluewater 50 across the Atlantic...and pointed out how Discovery Yachts bought Bluewater Cats as well as Southerly Yachts (which this couple has long-sailed).

Now as I mentioned at that time, you can see some similarities in the boat types and usages here across this Discovery line (lifting keel monos for very shallow draft, etc.). And I think most would say that Southerly and Discovery yachts are definitely fit for crossing oceans. This Distant Shores couple certainly would - and have many, many times. But in watching some of their videos I came across something eye-catching...

Here is a still from one of their many Atlantic crossings on their Southerly 49 I believe...










Notice anything?

So, again, all these various dictums about what's good and bad for ocean crossings are FAR more blurred than has been traditionally painted on sailing forums. There are a hell of a lot of swept-back spreaders out there. I would just much prefer mine to be on a multi.


----------



## smackdaddy

Hey guys - how does an Antares 44 cat pull down around twice the amount of an FP Helia 44 for the same length and year?


----------



## Arcb

Yipes, here is a Edit: a cruising cat that flipped at anchor.


----------



## smackdaddy

In a tornado. 

The same video shows a large sunken trawler as well. The most important lesson here was that this guy seemed to not know what he was doing and made LOTS of mistakes anchoring and even starting his engine. That's about it. He was lucky the funnel didn't get close enough to him to experience the same fate.

How are these examples relevant to this thread?


----------



## Arcb

I don't see why it isn't relevant. The OP mentioned safety and seaworthiness in the first post. I thought we were trying to have a balanced discussion. If one person shows a vid of a cruising cat surfing at 27 knots to show seaworthiness, why isn't it reasonable to show the other side of the coin. Or, in this case, the other side of the boat


----------



## paulinnanaimo

I'll bite, how does an Antares 44 pull down around twice the amount of an FP Helia 44?


----------



## smackdaddy

Arcb said:


> I don't see why it isn't relevant. The OP mentioned safety and seaworthiness in the first post. I thought we were trying to have a balanced discussion. If one person shows a vid of a cruising cat surfing at 27 knots to show seaworthiness, why isn't it reasonable to show the other side of the coin. Or, in this case, the other side of the boat


I would love to have a balanced discussion. I think the difference in my mind is that, as I said above, I don't expect ANY boat to be "safe" in a hurricane or a tornado strike. Those situations are far beyond the envelope for *cruising*.

On the other hand, I do think that getting hit by an F8 or F9 is relatively likely if you're out cruising - and knowing how to control the boat in those conditions is what I'm personally most interested in from the multi sailors around here.

Controlling the boat in a tornado doesn't have much value or relevance to me in this kind of learning. So I don't really go around looking for those videos, etc. Anyway, I just thought you guys had already created a thread *specifically* for multi capsizes. But this ain't my thread so knock yourself out.


----------



## smackdaddy

Arcb said:


> Sure, but on autopilot can mean a lot of different things. Were they in the salon watching reruns of gilligans island on autopilot, or did they have someone standing by the over ride. Surfing at 27 knots in a cruising cat, they would be pretty foolish not to have somebody keeping a close eye on things, whether they were lucky enough to survive or not.
> 
> https://ww2.bandg.com/product/triton2-autopilot-controller/


I took another look. There's a Triton controller at the helm but I don't see one at the nav table. And by the comments, it seems there were only the 3 people aboard.

So it looks kinda like Gilligan was "steering". In any case, I certainly wouldn't want to STEER in those conditions and speeds with a freakin' AP control.


----------



## Dog8It

Some of the trimarans appear to be relatively fast. Perhaps with good weather routing / planning most of the storms can be avoided. Rapido tris look pretty fast, though they sure do cost a pretty penny.










https://youtu.be/w7hIaMqTZbk?t=68


----------



## Arcb

smackdaddy said:


> . In any case, I certainly wouldn't want to STEER in those conditions and speeds with a freakin' AP control.


Why not, jog controls aren't bad to steer with. Wear a remote on a lanyard around your neck, or stuff it in your pocket. Don't know if the folks in your vid had a remote, but they are pretty common.


----------



## Arcb

They look like this. Auto does the heavy lifting and you jog or dodge as necessary, the system automatically reverts to auto pilot after you have made your alteration.

https://ww2.bandg.com/product/wr10-wireless-remote/


----------



## smackdaddy

I don't know, going 20+ knots down waves and having the choice of only 1° or 10° steering increments, plus the delay of moving back through those increments to swing the rudders? That's like steering a bicycle down a steep winding street holding string attached to the handlebars.

No thanks. I'd MUCH rather hand-steer and have a feel for what the boat is doing.

PS - Just saw your remote. It looks like it's not incrementally constrained like the helm controller (though I don't see any details on how those p/s buttons work). Still - no thanks. Not in those conditions. But it doesn't really matter because I'd likely have a drogue out and be going WAY slower than they were. So it wouldn't be nearly as much an issue.


----------



## Arcb

Don't knock it until you have tried it. They are not bad. I ran a 60 foot stern trawler with one (not a B&G) and I never ever used the wheel. It was good for the owners because they could drop a crewman. Basically I could run the crane and drive the boat at the same time. Which left one man to run the net hauler and one to haul the net (2 crew plus myself). The unit I had also had gear controls but no throttle. So you would set the throttles on the bridge, walk back to the crane, left hand on the remote control, right on the crane Joy. We hauled nets in some pretty rough conditions, granted, not at any kind of speed, but net hauling is not easy because you need to back into the seas so you don't blow over your trawl. 

Keep in mind, in your vid, the cruisers aren't in control, they have a pro skipper with them (I think).


----------



## smackdaddy

Yeah, as I said, I have no problem using the AP and/or a remote at *much* lower speeds. I've done a few thousand miles of that. And though I never quite got around to connecting it, I could have used our iPads/iPhones as AP controllers/repeaters with our iNavX/iMux setup. I would have loved that.

So, I'm all about the AP. Just not at speed in big waves...while relying on Bluetooth. Nope.

PS - I'm saying these things from the perspective of my experience on monos (and a beachcat). Maybe the cruising cat folks will tell me it's different with more responsive multis. I don't know. We'll see.


----------



## Capt Len

Thrill rides down big wave face can reach a point where it's not so good. 35 ft breaking following sea like what's common off the West coast can broach or bury most vessels regardless of expert steering.Comes a point where you turn about if you can and dodge under power until things improve. If you are North Atlantic you hope you don't ice up and roll. Lots can go wrong ,drogues chafe, loss of power .Capsizing your cat because you think it's invincible and you tube is all just tells me you need some real experience before I get impressed.


----------



## Noelex

smackdaddy said:


> In a tornado.


There was another cruising cat that flipped at anchor in Greece around 2011. It was a bad storm. One crew member was trapped inside, but was rescued by a very brave guy from the local yacht club.

I think it was a Prout Snowgoose from memory.


----------



## mbianka

Minnewaska said:


> Are there any reasonably sized cats with a centerline master berth that you can approach from the side, like a human and not like a dog climbing into it's dog house? I know centerlines don't make good sea berths, but we all spend hundreds of times more nights at anchor than overnight at sea. My current is the first boat I didn't have to climb in from the end and it's a real game changer.


I don't "hate" Catamarans but, I have no desire to own one. I usually do at least two charters a year in the off season on them As it is my gals preference. So have been on twenty or more over the years.

The bunks are one of my biggest bugaboos about them. Every Cat we have been on requires a climb into the bunk. At first it may not seem so bad. May be fine if you are a twenty something but, it gets old (no pun intended) as you get older and have to answer natures call several times a night. I find myself at the end of a ten day charter looking forward to using a normal bed and appreciate the ease of getting in and out of the bunk on my own monohull. That's if you have no injuries like a pulled muscle which can make getting in and out of the bunk on the Cat extremely painful. We also have to make sure the layout of the bunk on our charter allows for each of us to worm out of it individually and not have to climb over each other. Which is not fun for either person.


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> Sure, but on autopilot can mean a lot of different things. Were they in the salon watching reruns of gilligans island on autopilot, or did they have someone standing by the over ride. Surfing at 27 knots in a cruising cat, they would be pretty foolish not to have somebody keeping a close eye on things, whether they were lucky enough to survive or not.
> 
> https://ww2.bandg.com/product/triton2-autopilot-controller/


I'm not sure why the Triton AP controller was linked, or what it means, but we have a modern B&G/Simrad autopilot. If you haven't used one of the new AP's recently, you may be surprised at how well they anticipate, adjust, and steer. Better than me in pretty much all conditions. Definitely better than me in all conditions for more than an hour.

The newer autopilots, particularly those from B&G and NKE, are quite different beasts than in the old days (5 years ago). They use 9-axis rate compasses (ours even uses heave in its calculations, along with pitch and roll), accept 100hz data from all instrumentation, and have fast computers using steering and prediction algorithms developed from RTW southern ocean racing. These are the same AP's the Volvo and other race boats are using, only they have some specialized software specifically tailored to their boats and polars.

Not all current AP's are like this (Garmin appears to be atrocious), but B&G and NKE definitely are.

Mark

Edit: I see now that this AP controller shows in the video. While I wouldn't be doing those speeds in that boat, I would have no problem letting this AP have complete control. It is better than I am. Remotes are useless for instantaneous steering, like one is proposing necessary in the video conditions. They are fine for course changes, dodging, and the like - but not as a substitute for hand steering in large conditions. Leave that to the AP.


----------



## Arcb

Colemj, if you are telling me you have had one of the above mentioned autopilots steer you out of a broach or a steering linkage failure at 27 knots in a cruising cat, I am going to have to take your word for it.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> Notice anything?
> 
> So, again, all these various dictums about what's good and bad for ocean crossings are FAR more blurred than has been traditionally painted on sailing forums. There are a hell of a lot of swept-back spreaders out there. I would just much prefer mine to be on a multi.


This aspect is less extreme in a catamaran because of the beam. The spreaders sweep to an angle to the chainplates. The chainplates on a catamaran are much further out, so the sweep angle is less acute.

I agree that swept spreaders are no problem in any boat, but they are even less of a problem on a catamaran.

Mark


----------



## SanderO

colemj said:


> The newer autopilots, particularly those from B&G and NKE, are quite different beasts than in the old days (5 years ago). They use 9-axis rate compasses (ours even uses heave in its calculations, along with pitch and roll), accept 100hz data from all instrumentation, and have fast computers using steering and prediction algorithms developed from RTW southern ocean racing. These are the same AP's the Volvo and other race boats are using, only they have some specialized software specifically tailored to their boats and polars.
> 
> Mark


This is interesting and I would love to sail on a similar boat to mine with one of the newer pilots.

In the end the AP is driving the rudder position and all that data is distilled to turns to port or starboard. There may be software which can adapt to more or less constant eave patterns... and so anticipate turns and so forth. It's hard for me to conceptualize how confused seas and gust data can be correlated into better tracking. Sure locking the helm in one position is a bad solution to steering a course.

My old Alpha does have yaw settings and "speed of response" and I can see it making lots of corrections depending on how I set the "response" and yaw. It does S at times and it seems that a helmsman could do better.... and I often hand steer in those crazy conditions... It's kinda fun. but not for more than an hr... and they I let the AP steer.

A lot depends on the boat's hull LWL, weight and of course the conditions.


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> Colemj, if you are telling me you have had one of the above mentioned autopilots steer you out of a broach or a steering linkage failure at 27 knots in a cruising cat, I am going to have to take your word for it.


We don't do 27kts, and would never do it. Our AP (the one above) steers us out of potential broaches all the time by never getting us into broaching positions. It anticipates these as well as I can, does so longer than I can, and does it at night - where I cannot.

Our AP has also steered us just fine for 24hrs downwind in 35-40kts (reefed to keep the boat at 8kts) with a broken steering linkage, where the only boat control was the rudder with the drive connected. I didn't even know the link had broken - all I remember is thinking that the AP was a bit more active than usual.

These AP's are continually monitoring all instruments and boat performance 100 times per second, and are continually adjusting their steering to suit. They actively avoid jibing downwind, and through rate sensors on 9 axis, they know before hand when a broach is possible and steer away from it. Heck, it even continually optimizes VMG upwind, and can also steer to a polar table. At some point in the above link failure, I'm sure the boat got really squirrely, but the AP almost instantly picked up on that and adjusted the steering parameters to compensate.

BTW, it isn't possible to get out of a steering linkage failure by hand steering - there is no connection of the wheel to the rudders then. The AP is the only hope.

Again, if you haven't used one of these newer AP's, you will be surprised at how much has changed.

Also, see my edit above - I now understand why you linked to the Triton.

Mark


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> Hey guys - how does an Antares 44 cat pull down around twice the amount of an FP Helia 44 for the same length and year?


They are another step up in fit and finish and gear than the Helia, if not two steps, and they are bespoke made, so don't have volume economies. I doubt they build more than 2 a year. They also have a cult following, which helps support the price.

They are an old design, and pretty well superseded now. I've never seen one floating on its design waterline because the hull shape does not carry weight well. However, we are in a glass house in this regard...

Mark


----------



## Arcb

colemj said:


> We don't do 27kts, and would never do it. Our AP (the one above) steers us out of potential broaches all the time by never getting us into broaching positions. It anticipates these as well as I can, does so longer than I can, and does it at night - where I cannot.
> 
> Our AP has also steered us just fine for 24hrs downwind in 35-40kts (reefed to keep the boat at 8kts) with a broken steering linkage, where the only boat control was the rudder with the drive connected. I didn't even know the link had broken - all I remember is thinking that the AP was a bit more active than usual.
> 
> These AP's are continually monitoring all instruments and boat performance 100 times per second, and are continually adjusting their steering to suit. They actively avoid jibing downwind, and through rate sensors on 9 axis, they know before hand when a broach is possible and steer away from it. Heck, it even continually optimizes VMG upwind, and can also steer to a polar table. At some point in the above link failure, I'm sure the boat got really squirrely, but the AP almost instantly picked up on that and adjusted the steering parameters to compensate.
> 
> BTW, it isn't possible to get out of a steering linkage failure by hand steering - there is no connection of the wheel to the rudders then. The AP is the only hope.
> 
> Again, if you haven't used one of these newer AP's, you will be surprised at how much has changed.
> 
> Also, see my edit above - I now understand why you linked to the Triton.
> 
> Mark


If you say so, most catamarans i am familiar with have two rudders, two steering linkages leaving one to steer with in the event of a failure.

Yes, I have used high end autopilots in big cats offshore.

The boat in the video was overpowered. The bows were stuffing. A few more knots and the bows could have buried, there could have been a rapid deceleration forward, the breaking waves at the stern would have had a 52 foot lever to push the stern around the bow broadside to the waves at 27 knots. I dont beleive an autopilot could have steered out of that. Autopilots are reactive by nature. A helmsman can see a breaking wave or a gust before it hits.

They were sailing that boat on the edge, having blind faith in your technology to get you out of problems in conditions like that is unwise in my opinion.


----------



## colemj

SanderO said:


> This is interesting and I would love to sail on a similar boat to mine with one of the newer pilots.
> 
> In the end the AP is driving the rudder position and all that data is distilled to turns to port or starboard. There may be software which can adapt to more or less constant eave patterns... and so anticipate turns and so forth. It's hard for me to conceptualize how confused seas and gust data can be correlated into better tracking. Sure locking the helm in one position is a bad solution to steering a course.
> 
> My old Alpha does have yaw settings and "speed of response" and I can see it making lots of corrections depending on how I set the "response" and yaw. It does S at times and it seems that a helmsman could do better.... and I often hand steer in those crazy conditions... It's kinda fun. but not for more than an hr... and they I let the AP steer.
> 
> A lot depends on the boat's hull LWL, weight and of course the conditions.


Yes, all an AP can do is drive the rudder position. However, that is all a human can do also. Modern AP's can actually react faster than a human because they get the same data faster. Some data isn't even apparent to a human - how much aware of heave are you in a long passage, or how aware of 2* wind shifts or 2kt wind increases/decreases?

In challenging conditions, I sometimes sit at the wheel with my hands lightly on it and pretend I'm steering. Every time, whenever I would start to move my hands for an anticipated adjustment, the AP would turn the wheel under them. Sometimes the AP would turn gently when I didn't think necessary, but then I realized a second later that I would have needed to make a larger correct later.

Confused seas and gusts just get translated into faster and larger corrections by the AP. Granted, these are often more reactionary corrections than predictive ones, but it is often this way for a human too. Since the AP is making calculations 100 times each second, it can react quickly to the boat going off.

All of those race boats whipping around at high speeds in the Southern Ocean, even single handers, are pretty much using commercial AP gear. The software is slightly tweeked specifically for their boats, and can take data from instruments we generally don't use (like strain gauges, multiple wind, etc) but the basic algorithms are the same.

Mark


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> If you say so, most catamarans i am familiar with have two rudders, two steering linkages leaving one to steer with in the event of a failure.
> 
> Yes, I have used high end autopilots in big cats offshore.
> 
> The boat in the video was overpowered. The bows were stuffing. A few more knots and the bows could have buried, there could have been a rapid deceleration forward, the breaking waves at the stern would have had a 52 foot lever to push the stern around the bow broadside to the waves at 27 knots. I dont beleive an autopilot could have steered out of that. Autopilots are reactive by nature. A helmsman can see a breaking wave or a gust before it hits.
> 
> They were sailing that boat on the edge, having blind faith in your technology to get you out of problems in conditions like that is unwise in my opinion.


Depends on the steering system design and which part breaks. If the chain or associated sprocket or cable holders breaks, you lose all wheel control. If a cable breaks, you also lose wheel control. If a crossbar breaks, you may or may not have control of one rudder depending on if the system uses a single quadrant or splits between two. Ours is a pull-pull system, so a cable issue anywhere disconnects the wheel from the rudders. If a hydraulic system using independent drives on each rudder, then you have control of one rudder if one drive or cross link fails. If they are all integral, you lose it all if there is a hydraulic failure.

I would say at least 50% of catamarans will lose steerage from the wheel if any link breaks in the system. The number is probably higher than 50%. All single helm ones will lose it if the chain/sprocket system breaks.

I agree with being overpowered. However, I don't see a human getting out of a broach or stuff either. Particularly with that boat, which isn't the most responsive or light helm.

Modern autopilots are not purely reactive. Ours predicts. You can see this in action. 20-100 times per second it is getting pitch, roll, heave, heading, wind, SOW, and SOG data. A helmsman can see a breaking wave or wind gust on the water before an AP, but I'm not sure how much realistic space is there to do anything predictive in those conditions. You certainly aren't going to make large alterations in steering to prevent or adjust to that. Almost everyone in these conditions will have slowed the boat down so that breaking seas and wind gusts do not cause steering issues.

How good is a human in these conditions at night? Worse than a good AP IMO.

Those ocean racers are on AP constantly and they only have one rudder/steering system, where a break anywhere takes them down.

You may have experience with modern AP's in big catamarans offshore, but the only actual reference I have seen you give has been large commercial power vessels. These are apples and oranges to small recreational sail cats in both boat type and AP gear. Can you be more specific as to which recreational sailing catamarans and which AP's you have experience with?

Mark


----------



## capecodda

So I have an honest question for you multi-guys, which I'll setup with a Disclaimer and my specific limited cat experiences: 

DISCLAIMER:
Anyone who wants to sail anything, i'm on your side. To me, the argument over who's form of fun is better than they other guys fun for an absolutely unnecessary frivolous activity like sailing is, well, a debate for people who apparently aren't getting enough conflict in their lives. The real question is will anybody be left sailing anything 50 years from now, or will they all be sitting in their living rooms wearing VR googles and getting pizza delivery by drone, while arguing about what VR experience is better than another on social media .

So, with that disclaimer, I'll undo my own argument by stepping into the fray:

MY CAT EXPERIENCE:
Is my perception wrong about cruising cats? I've only chartered them twice, once in Belize and once in the BVI. I found that even when I was going 8 knots, I felt like I was sailing my dock. I had to look at the water rushing by or I'd think I was still tied up. It just didn't do it for me. That said, anchored up with my friends, it was a wicked good party platform and comfortable living. Not to mention, didn't even need to put my beer in a holder underway. 

At the other end of the spectrum, I really enjoyed when I was younger getting out on the trapeze on a Hobie 16. What a blast. Yea, I read smack and others experienced pitch poles, and yea I did too. As a teen ager swinging up in the air when a hull went in was exciting. Gotta get your weight aft when a hull flies and it really goes. 

THE QUESTION:
So the question is, are their cruising cats that aren't like sailing your dock? More like the Hobie, a bit more civilized, without turning into a barge with a mast on it? That might interest me. Anyplace I can charter one?


----------



## Minnewaska

mbianka said:


> .....Every Cat we have been on requires a climb into the bunk. At first it may not seem so bad. May be fine if you are a twenty something but, it gets old (no pun intended) as you get older and have to answer natures call several times a night. I find myself at the end of a ten day charter looking forward to using a normal bed and appreciate the ease of getting in and out of the bunk on my own monohull. That's if you have no injuries like a pulled muscle which can make getting in and out of the bunk on the Cat extremely painful. We also have to make sure the layout of the bunk on our charter allows for each of us to worm out of it individually and not have to climb over each other. Which is not fun for either person.


Interesting, thank you, another post above left me with a different impression.

I totally agree about berth access, as the joints start passing their freshness date. When we're aboard a bareboat or maybe a friend's boat, with a traditional dog house quarter berth, I have to give myself a pep talk. You've done this many times, you can do it again!

Unrelated to a cat, I once got a charlie horse in my hamstring, while I was stuffed into a quarter berth. The only way to relieve such a thing is to stretch the muscle, until the spasm stops. However, the overhead in the berth was maybe 3 ft and I could not lift my leg high enough. I couldn't shimmy out either. Left a mental scar. :eek 

I prefer a berth I can comfortably exit from the side, which is admittedly a luxury.


----------



## Arcb

You are correct, commercial power cats only in this size range, but one was a high speed rig (3 years, faster than 27 knots) and of similar size to the one in the vid, 60 feet. Same rules apply surfing down waves whether recreational or not, except that power cats are easier to control because you can back off the power. 

You are probably also correct that a helmsman could not have steered out of a serious broach at those speeds, but I definitely would have one standing by with the AP over ride in hand.

To be clear, I am not saying turn the AP off and steer by hand for the duration of the blow. I am saying it would be wise to have a real helmsman standing by with the ability to immediately over ride the AP if necessary, that is why I linked the pics of the portable controls. If you have the control with you and you see something going sideways, like say a telephone pole floating in the water, you just hit the jog button and over ride, then let AP take back over.


----------



## Minnewaska

Arcb said:


> Y.....I am saying it would be wise to have a real helmsman standing by with the ability to immediately over ride the AP if necessary.......


Absolutely. +1000


----------



## SanderO

colemj said:


> Yes, all an AP can do is drive the rudder position....but the basic algorithms are the same.
> 
> Mark


There is a diminishing return. My AP has steered 10s of thousands of miles... coastal, off shore. It's not perfect but it does better than I do and doesn't need rest or food. The course plots are damn good... But sure there is some wandering.

The AP does not have the full range of helm rotation.... it basically MOSTLY makes rather small course corrections based on whatever data it is using. If I wanted to turn hard over instantly.... AP can't do it. I can manually.

So for example when I approach the fuel dock in NPT... I approach heading south in the channel and make a tight as possible 180 even using reverse to kick the stern over. Not possible with the AP. Tight AP 180 won't work because there is not enough sea room... I use AP until I am ready to execute the turn. I doubt a new gen AP would do this.

I see little reason to "upspec".... but I would need to experience it to make the determination.


----------



## outbound

What upsets me about this thread and many threads on this forum is how some neglect a basic reality that underpins most cruisers mentality when thinking about boats. This reality extends across all classes be it monos,multis or motor.

There are good seaboats and those not so much.

Comparisons between classes of boats is foolish if not also accounting for if that specific craft is a good or bad seaboat. Grand Banks are wonderful, beautiful, comfortable great loop or coastal cruisers. Sea rays give great bang for the buck. Neither are designed to be or are expedition yachts.
You can blow big bucks and get an light ice Diesel Duck 492 for less than the glorious GB but only the first is the rtw boat. You can quadruple the purchase price and walk on a Seaton or Cape Scott and get the bling with the sea keeping ability to sail the Southern ocean.
The same occurs with monos or multis.

Looking at the title of this thread believe we should be looking at specific boats and critiqueing that specific design. Multis have several vulnerabilities as do monos or motor. This obsession about inverting limits this thread to one of many concerns so is much less informative than it could be.
Look at the various cats you see in Caribbean charter. These are like the Searays. Even in that relatively benign setting one sees:
They hobby horse. When motoring to windward( such as entering an anchorage) this is so extreme as to be dangerous to the occupants. Their beam to length ratio is moderate but capsize risk decreased by moderate rigs. They aim toward one level living with large expanses of glass. But a violent pooping may result in failure of the aft glass enclosure or its rim of support leading to down flooding. The steering is designed for the stresses of forward movement. Falling backwards after being stalled on the face of a wave may result in catastrophic steering failure. Interior living space is optimized for pleasant living at anchor with bridge deck forward of the mast and beam of hulls brought forward to allow a four berth set up. Beyond unpleasant burping the behavior in a seaway is compromised. They have low aspect fixed keels. Beyond decreasing ability to point increased possibilities of “tripping” on a large wave face is increased. Helm position is high and exposed. This is tiring to the helmsman and compromises ability to see the whole boat.

Now compare this to a boat designed as a seaboat. Perhaps the Rapido 60referred to above.
Single rudder. No linkage issues. Very fine hulls and very wide beam with much more force required to turn turtle. No significant structure beyond central hull before the mast. Daggerboard no fixed keel. Protected helm station. Walkways and rig designed to be worked in a seaway. No large glass expanses vulnerable in a pooping or from green water. 

In short just like a Diesel Duck would seem to be a better seaboat than a Searay the R60 would seem to be a better seaboat than the charter cat.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> I would love to have a balanced discussion. I think the difference in my mind is that, as I said above, I don't expect ANY boat to be "safe" in a hurricane or a tornado strike. Those situations are far beyond the envelope for *cruising*.


How do you avoid tornadoes when you are *cruising*? Even in relatively tame (weather-wise) Maryland we have tornadoes all the time. I would imagine they are more common in Florida and the Gulf. Case in point: summer before last when I was coming up the Bay *(cruising!)*, the weather started to look pretty threatening and I was pondering if I should hunker down for a bit in the Severn River. Well, the decision was made for me when the CG came up on 16 with a tornado warning (not watch) for -- tadaa-- the Severn River!

I stayed in the middle of the Bay and things went well, never saw the tornado though A LOT of wind, thunder and lightning. I certainly don't want to get hit by a tornado at any time and I would expect very severe damage to my boat including dismasting. But I do not expect that it flips upside down (and stays there) or sinks. And you consider this normal for a catamaran, and that at anchor, with no sails up?

So, my point is, a boat for which encountering a tornado is "far beyond the envelope" is by definition not a boat for cruising.


----------



## gonecrusin

smj said:


> It's obvious you know nothing of the incident and even more obvious you know absolutely nothing about catamarans. Enjoy whatever you sail and I hope it treats you well.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I've spent enough time on multi's.

Tell us, how do you handle this, on a multi, at night, with a short crew inside and sheets cleated off? Anna, Leopard and Fujin come to mind.

We're talking good and bad right?


----------



## smackdaddy

Noelex said:


> There was another cruising cat that flipped at anchor in Greece around 2011. It was a bad storm. One crew member was trapped inside, but was rescued by a very brave guy from the local yacht club.
> 
> I think it was a Prout Snowgoose from memory.


So what is the takeaway on this in your opinion?


----------



## colemj

capecodda said:


> So the question is, are their cruising cats that aren't like sailing your dock? More like the Hobie, a bit more civilized, without turning into a barge with a mast on it? That might interest me. Anyplace I can charter one?


In absolute terms, no. On the other hand, there aren't any 40-60' cruising monohulls that sail like a Laser, only a bit more civilized.

In relative terms, there is a whole spectrum of sailing "feeling" in cruising catamarans, just like there is in monohulls. But for both types of boats, if pure sailing joy is what you are after, you will be disappointed unless you take a nice little performance sailing dinghy along with you.

Most people associate healing and riding in sync with waves while the boat moves in a certain way as their understanding of sailing "feeling". This is more a Pavlovian response, because this is how almost everyone starts in boats, and continues for a ways before moving to a catamaran. And then the move is usually to a large catamaran - where they think they are driving a dock.

Moving from a Laser, to a J35, to a Formosa 50 will give one the same experience.

However, catamarans do have their "grooves", and a lot of the joy is to be speeding along at 9-10kts with a "dock" under you, while you play guitar, cook a good meal, take a nice nap in the hammock, or pay attention to your spread of 4-6 fishing lines.

This is also a learned response over time, and going back on a mono heeled and rolling feels more like surviving than sailing.

And what one wants for an afternoon sail is completely different than what one wants for a 2-3 week passage (or even a 1-2 day passage). Sporting sailing is fun for one and can be tedious for the other.

So it depends on what you think sailing needs to "feel" like, and to what degree you will allow that to degrade before not enjoying it. Also, how you will be sailing. Again, a 50' Oyster is not going to "feel" like a Melges 24 - so there is always going to be a degradation tradeoff.

BTW, it is a very reasonable question and didn't need a disclaimer.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> I'm not sure why the Triton AP controller was linked, or what it means, but we have a modern B&G/Simrad autopilot. If you haven't used one of the new AP's recently, you may be surprised at how well they anticipate, adjust, and steer. Better than me in pretty much all conditions. Definitely better than me in all conditions for more than an hour.
> 
> The newer autopilots, particularly those from B&G and NKE, are quite different beasts than in the old days (5 years ago). They use 9-axis rate compasses (ours even uses heave in its calculations, along with pitch and roll), accept 100hz data from all instrumentation, and have fast computers using steering and prediction algorithms developed from RTW southern ocean racing. These are the same AP's the Volvo and other race boats are using, only they have some specialized software specifically tailored to their boats and polars.
> 
> Not alThat's l current AP's are like this (Garmin appears to be atrocious), but B&G and NKE definitely are.
> 
> Mark
> 
> Edit: I see now that this AP controller shows in the video. While I wouldn't be doing those speeds in that boat, I would have no problem letting this AP have complete control. It is better than I am. Remotes are useless for instantaneous steering, like one is proposing necessary in the video conditions. They are fine for course changes, dodging, and the like - but not as a substitute for hand steering in large conditions. Leave that to the AP.


That's good feedback. Yes, my experience has been on older units. I know that the Vendee boats rely almost exclusively on AP (Lecomble & Schmitt I believe) - so I have no doubt that the technology has come a long, long way.

I guess what bugs me so much about that video is that they are sitting inside watching as the boat - at least to my eye - gets increasingly out of control. And they are talking about "breaking records". To me, and please let me know if this is wrong, they are completely disconnected from reality. It just looks like they are, as you say, "leaving it to the AP" - but their problem isn't steering - it's boat control. Therefore, it seems they are asking FAR too much of that AP and should be DOING something to maintain safety.


----------



## colemj

Minnewaska said:


> Interesting, thank you, another post above left me with a different impression.


It really is easy to do a search for your question. Under 55', Lagoon has 7 models with side entry berths - the smallest, oldest L380 is the only boat they make that doesn't have this. The entire Fountaine-Pajot line has side entry berths - they don't make a boat without them.

Google will find you others, but the above should be representative enough to dispel any thought that this design type is rare.










Mark


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> To be clear, I am not saying turn the AP off and steer by hand for the duration of the blow. I am saying it would be wise to have a real helmsman standing by with the ability to immediately over ride the AP if necessary, that is why I linked the pics of the portable controls. If you have the control with you and you see something going sideways, like say a telephone pole floating in the water, you just hit the jog button and over ride, then let AP take back over.


On our boat, there is always someone on watch ready to take the wheel at all times regardless of weather. I don't think there will be anyone debating whether in a blow it is a good idea to all be down sleeping and watching TV.

A portable control really isn't going to do much in this situation. It certainly isn't going to prevent a broach or dodge a wave, and I doubt anyone would see a log in those conditions. For anything that might happen, it is best to hit standby and take the helm oneself. BTW, that Triton control pad you link to isn't a portable control - it is to be mounted on a bulkhead. They are "portable" in the sense that they are small and inexpensive, so you can mount several of them in different places on the boat.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Arcb said:


> You are correct, commercial power cats only in this size range, but one was a high speed rig (3 years, faster than 27 knots) and of similar size to the one in the vid, 60 feet. Same rules apply surfing down waves whether recreational or not, except that power cats are easier to control because you can back off the power.
> 
> You are probably also correct that a helmsman could not have steered out of a serious broach at those speeds, but I definitely would have one standing by with the AP over ride in hand.
> 
> To be clear, I am not saying turn the AP off and steer by hand for the duration of the blow. I am saying it would be wise to have a real helmsman standing by with the ability to immediately over ride the AP if necessary, that is why I linked the pics of the portable controls. If you have the control with you and you see something going sideways, like say a telephone pole floating in the water, you just hit the jog button and over ride, then let AP take back over.


I think the disconnect in this ongoing conversation really has very little to do with the autopilot - whatever brand and technology we're talking about. The problem is that this boat was out of control. The human intervention, first and foremost, should have been in getting the boat slowed down. Until that happened, it doesn't matter what kind of AP they had or how awesome it was.

That, I believe, is what Mark is saying - as am I.

Vendee boats do 27+ knots pretty easily for tens of thousands of miles on their APs. They are not Leopard 50 cruising cats. So it's not about the AP.


----------



## Minnewaska

colemj said:


> It really is easy to do a search for your question......


No kidding. It was just a curiosity. As you can see, some feel the need to add disclaimers before asking questions. Think about it.


----------



## colemj

SanderO said:


> There is a diminishing return. My AP has steered 10s of thousands of miles... coastal, off shore. It's not perfect but it does better than I do and doesn't need rest or food. The course plots are damn good... But sure there is some wandering.
> 
> The AP does not have the full range of helm rotation.... it basically MOSTLY makes rather small course corrections based on whatever data it is using. If I wanted to turn hard over instantly.... AP can't do it. I can manually.
> 
> So for example when I approach the fuel dock in NPT... I approach heading south in the channel and make a tight as possible 180 even using reverse to kick the stern over. Not possible with the AP. Tight AP 180 won't work because there is not enough sea room... I use AP until I am ready to execute the turn. I doubt a new gen AP would do this.
> 
> I see little reason to "upspec".... but I would need to experience it to make the determination.


I'm not sure many would want to use their AP to go to a fuel dock. We use ours for almost everything, but will dock the boat by hand. Also not sure how many would require their AP to go hard over instantly.

On the other hand, our AP has full range stop-to-stop control of the helm, and a 5 second hard over time. With a push of a single button it goes into manual mode, where holding down the buttons moves it about as fast as I can. If we had the other controller, it has a knob for steering like this.

I believe I could dock it using just the AP, but it is much easier to use the wheel based on the motion efficiency alone. Underway, if we need to dodge something, the AP can turn the boat 90* in 2-3 seconds. Our AP can auto tack and has adjustable tack times. Ours is set for 6 seconds, and it does go through tacks that fast. It could go faster, but catamarans don't tack that fast.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

This is a great post cape...my thoughts below...



capecodda said:


> So I have an honest question for you multi-guys, which I'll setup with a Disclaimer and my specific limited cat experiences:
> 
> DISCLAIMER:
> Anyone who wants to sail anything, i'm on your side. To me, the argument over who's form of fun is better than they other guys fun for an absolutely unnecessary frivolous activity like sailing is, well, a debate for people who apparently aren't getting enough conflict in their lives. The real question is will anybody be left sailing anything 50 years from now, or will they all be sitting in their living rooms wearing VR googles and getting pizza delivery by drone, while arguing about what VR experience is better than another on social media .


Yes, there will be sailing. From everything I see, there are more young people getting into sailing now than there has been for decades. I think that's because the used boat market it absolutely flush with "cheap" boats. But they are also getting into much higher end boats because a large chunk of of them have far more spending power then ever in history for this group (have you seen what a software developer pulls down in salaray?).

So, no worries.



capecodda said:


> So, with that disclaimer, I'll undo my own argument by stepping into the fray:
> 
> MY CAT EXPERIENCE:
> Is my perception wrong about cruising cats? I've only chartered them twice, once in Belize and once in the BVI. I found that even when I was going 8 knots, I felt like I was sailing my dock. I had to look at the water rushing by or I'd think I was still tied up. It just didn't do it for me. That said, anchored up with my friends, it was a wicked good party platform and comfortable living. Not to mention, didn't even need to put my beer in a holder underway.
> 
> At the other end of the spectrum, I really enjoyed when I was younger getting out on the trapeze on a Hobie 16. What a blast. Yea, I read smack and others experienced pitch poles, and yea I did too. As a teen ager swinging up in the air when a hull went in was exciting. Gotta get your weight aft when a hull flies and it really goes.
> 
> THE QUESTION:
> So the question is, are their cruising cats that aren't like sailing your dock? More like the Hobie, a bit more civilized, without turning into a barge with a mast on it? That might interest me. Anyplace I can charter one?


All I can add here is from the beachcat to mono perspective. What you describe is very similar to what actually happens as you go up in size for monos. Going from a C27 with a tiller, to a Pacific Seacraft 37 with a wheel felt like "losing touch" with the performance through the water. Yet, when you think about maintaining that level of "touch" over hundreds of miles 24/7 for days on end? No thanks. I'll leave that to the beachcat.

It was the same going to our Hunter 40. It felt slower and far less responsive at first until I got ITS feel. It wasn't slower or less responsive - actually the opposite.

So, though I can't tell you about this phenomenon on cruising cats, I have a hunch it's very much the same.


----------



## Arcb

colemj said:


> Edit: I see now that this AP controller shows in the video. While I wouldn't be doing those speeds in that boat, I would have no problem letting this AP have complete control. It is better than I am. Remotes are useless for instantaneous steering, like one is proposing necessary in the video conditions. They are fine for course changes, dodging, and the like - but not as a substitute for hand steering in large conditions. Leave that to the AP.


Just noticed this. Not sure when the last time you took a big broach in big weather on a big boat was, its not a guaranteed game ender, but stuff can get real fast. Stuff can break, rig can break, breakers might trip, people might fall. The boat might actually exceed a 90 degree course correction. If you have no one near the over ride, the auto pilot will do what auto pilots do, turn you back on course, back down wind, you will pick up speed again, maybe broach again, maybe stuff again, then you have more stuff breaking, more people falling.

Helmsman sitting at a control station or with a portable over ride on his person may decide the best escape from the broach is to temporarily turn up wind, slow the boat down, even if its just for 30 seconds so people can get back on their feet, he may decide to turn beam to the sea, or sail diagonally down the wave to scrub some speed. Your auto pilot that you insist on setting and forgetting can not do this.

You may convince the readers that surfing big boats in big seas that setting and forgetting the auto pilot is a good move, but you will not convince me it is, no need to even try.


----------



## Arcb

smackdaddy said:


> I think the disconnect in this ongoing conversation really has very little to do with the autopilot - whatever brand and technology we're talking about. The problem is that this boat was out of control. The human intervention, first and foremost, should have been in getting the boat slowed down. Until that happened, it doesn't matter what kind of AP they had or how awesome it was.
> 
> That, I believe, is what Mark is saying - as am I.
> 
> Vendee boats do 27+ knots pretty easily for tens of thousands of miles on their APs. They are not Leopard 50 cruising cats. So it's not about the AP.


I guess you missed it, I have stated these folks are sailing on the edge. The auto pilot might not be relevant to you, but if you are going to exceed safe sailing speed, keep your finger on the AP over ride. Not sure how this message got missed.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> That's good feedback. Yes, my experience has been on older units. I know that the Vendee boats rely almost exclusively on AP (Lecomble & Schmitt I believe) - so I have no doubt that the technology has come a long, long way.
> 
> I guess what bugs me so much about that video is that they are sitting inside watching as the boat - at least to my eye - gets increasingly out of control. And they are talking about "breaking records". To me, and please let me know if this is wrong, they are completely disconnected from reality. It just looks like they are, as you say, "leaving it to the AP" - but their problem isn't steering - it's boat control. Therefore, it seems they are asking FAR too much of that AP and should be DOING something to maintain safety.


Lecomble and Schmitt only make hydraulic drive units. I believe the autopilots on all of those boats are either B&G or NKE. These two brands are pretty much all professional racing boats use, and the technology is carried down into their consumer products (the important and proprietary parts are mostly just algorithms and software after all).

I agree, and have tried to state in different ways that there is no way we would find ourselves in that state. I don't know why the discussion got focused on autopilots and how to use them properly when doing 27kts in bad seas in a production catamaran - autopilots are completely beside the point here, and are rather like debating the car stereo while doing 100mph on an icy road with bald tires.

The boat shouldn't be allowed in that state period. If it was properly set to a reasonable speed, their would be no danger regardless of the quality of the autopilot.

Mark


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> Just noticed this. Not sure when the last time you took a big broach in big weather on a big boat was, its not a guaranteed game ender, but stuff can get real fast. Stuff can break, rig can break, breakers might trip, people might fall. The boat might actually exceed a 90 degree course correction. If you have no one near the over ride, the auto pilot will do what auto pilots do, turn you back on course, back down wind, you will pick up speed again, maybe broach again, maybe stuff again, then you have more stuff breaking, more people falling.
> 
> Helmsman sitting at a control station or with a portable over ride on his person may decide the best escape from the broach is to temporarily turn up wind, slow the boat down, even if its just for 30 seconds so people can get back on their feet, he may decide to turn beam to the sea, or sail diagonally down the wave to scrub some speed. Your auto pilot that you insist on setting and forgetting can not do this.
> 
> You may convince the readers that surfing big boats in big seas that setting and forgetting the auto pilot is a good move, but you will not convince me it is, no need to even try.


I don't know why you keep saying that I insist on setting and forgetting the AP while doing 27kts in those conditions. I have stated repeatedly that our boat will never find itself in that state. You seem to be creating the argument.

Once the boat has turned far off course, or steering control is lost, our AP sounds a loud alarm and tries to hold course - it does not try to go back to the original course. Our AP also tries to not steer down waves in a reactive mode such that the boat is yawing. It steers like a helmsman by feeling the point before the bow yaws and applying early rudder to compensate. In the trough, it does the same to bring it back before it yaws.

I don't know of many people who can recover a boat from a broach. Generally the physics overwhelms the steering foils and the best anyone can do is let the boat get on its feet and proceed from there. On a mono, the rudder and most of the keel isn't even in the water. This is not the case for a catamaran.

I don't understand why you are wound up on this AP thing? The video does not represent catamarans in general or any catamaran owner I know. The use of the AP is inconsequential to the situation they are in. My feeling is that a helmsman could not do a single thing differently than their AP to avoid, or get them out of, trouble. The video, IMO, only represents someone operating their boat unsafely - and the AP has nothing to do with that. Why aren't you picking on the full sail set instead?

BTW, broaching is rare on a catamaran because they tend to slide in those conditions. It is more a monohull thing. Pitchpoling from burying a bow is more likely in a catamaran.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> How do you avoid tornadoes when you are *cruising*? Even in relatively tame (weather-wise) Maryland we have tornadoes all the time. I would imagine they are more common in Florida and the Gulf. Case in point: summer before last when I was coming up the Bay *(cruising!)*, the weather started to look pretty threatening and I was pondering if I should hunker down for a bit in the Severn River. Well, the decision was made for me when the CG came up on 16 with a tornado warning (not watch) for -- tadaa-- the Severn River!
> 
> I stayed in the middle of the Bay and things went well, never saw the tornado though A LOT of wind, thunder and lightning. I certainly don't want to get hit by a tornado at any time and I would expect very severe damage to my boat including dismasting. But I do not expect that it flips upside down (and stays there) or sinks. And you consider this normal for a catamaran, and that at anchor, with no sails up?
> 
> So, my point is, a boat for which encountering a tornado is "far beyond the envelope" is by definition not a boat for cruising.


Well, keep in mind that I live in Texas and we had our boat in Florida. So tornadoes and major-storms/hurricanes are relatively common in our lives. Avoiding hurricanes is not that hard as I've discussed in my videos. You get off or stay off the boat after making it as secure as you can. In that case, boats of all kinds are still destroyed - but you are safe.

But again, that's not "cruising". That's simply a place where boats are sitting (either on the hard or in the water) getting hit and destroyed. So the type or make of boat doesn't matter. That's what we're seeing in the above examples here and why I'm not sure they really mean much to this discussion. Cruising, at least the kind where you travel longer distances from place to place, typically happens away from these anchorages in the examples.

Now, avoiding tornadoes can be very easy as well, or impossible. Every Texas and Florida sailor knows the maxim "Never cruise in Kansas". And we all pretty much stick to that. If you run the numbers, you'll see that there have been very few cruising sailors killed in Kansas by either tornadoes or hurricanes in either monohulls or multihulls. Heh-heh.

On the other hand, it can be impossible to avoid in JUST the right circumstance - like getting hit by lightning...especially if you're relatively close to land where thunderstorms can be far more powerful (like your example which I would equate to sailing in Galveston Bay like we used to do - but I wouldn't call that cruising).

We got fairly up-close to one (actually a big waterspout) while cruising off the coast of Florida...










Now, just like lightning, had this thing been coming right at us I don't think we could have avoided it. And had we gotten a direct hit - who knows what could have happened. And, to the point I think you and others are trying to make, it would have potentially been more dangerous in a cat simply because air can get under the central platform and make the boat fly (though that's impossible to say for sure). This is what I assume happened to that other boat shown in the Florida video that was hit by the tornado - and maybe even that Prout that Noelex mentioned.

But, I personally don't buy boats for their tornado or hurricane performance. I have no interest in that. I buy them to cruise. Our Hunter did very well on the hard in a direct strike from Category 2 Irma - and we were safe at home. But there were also a few cats in the same yard that did just as well. So, again, I'm not sure what that has to do with cruising.

As for the tornado, we got lucky. I think Charlie Doane frames your concerns about this best in that article on the CWD capsize I linked above...



> Discussing the event with Charles Nethersole, it really did sound to me like the purest piece of bad luck a bluewater sailor could ever hope to encounter, as though God himself, with no warning, had suddenly decided to poke you with a finger and squash you like a bug.


Indeed. Thar be dragons - and they don't care what kind of boat you're on.


----------



## colemj

capecodda said:


> The real question is will anybody be left sailing anything 50 years from now, or will they all be sitting in their living rooms wearing VR googles and getting pizza delivery by drone, while arguing about what VR experience is better than another on social media


Hehe. We have a friend cruising in a catamaran and he is anchored next to us right now. He just sold his virtual reality company, but is still working with the new owners in transition. He has top of the line computers and gear on his boat for doing his work. Those computers use 50-80 amps when rendering and displaying, and he has sensors installed about his boat that track movements.

When we go over there, we put on the headsets, the haptic feedback gear, and .... watch sailing!

Sometimes. He has a lot of footage of his boat under sail. Other times we are flying with the Blue Angels, or exploring Google Earth, or (my favorite) running around with the Miami Dolphin cheerleaders as they bounce about and go to the beach.

So maybe the future will be people sitting in their boats wearing VR googles!

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Mark - can you explain the more subtle differences in docking between a two-engine cat and a mono? I have to admit I was never the perfect docker on our mono. We always backed into slips, and ~5% of the time I would be carrying too much speed, or not aligned correctly, or whatever.

It seems you have much more fine control over a cat - both in terms of the engines, but also in terms of dealing with the momentum. Being able to literally spin the boat on a dime, and not have to mess with back-and-fill like on a mono, sounds pretty dreamy.


----------



## Arcb

How are you 2 saying I am stuck on APs. Somebody posted a vid of a big cruising cat surfing at 27 knots and I made one post basically saying I thought it would be foolish to leave that boat doing those speeds with an auto pilot in complete control of the boat. Then you two responded with pages of posts trying to prove me wrong, and it isnt working. I still think its foolish. 

I disagree that a big cat wont broach. There are physics at play here and those physics dont necessarily point to a 60 000 lb boat doing a stern over bow somersault down a wave front. When the bow stuffs it stops, the inertia in the 60000 lb boat wants to keep going, gavity wants the stern to stay down so that inertia could result in a horizontal rotation instead of a vertical rotation, thus resulting in a broach.

I know this isnt painting a very pretty picture of some of the challenges that can be faced by some boats in heavy weather, but its how it is. In conditions like that it really is a good idea to slow the boat down. Failing slowing the boat down, at least try to keep her under control, you do that in part by steering, not all, but some broaches can be recovered from, but not generally by an autopilot.


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> What upsets me about this thread and many threads on this forum is how some neglect a basic reality that underpins most cruisers mentality when thinking about boats. This reality extends across all classes be it monos,multis or motor.
> 
> There are good seaboats and those not so much.
> 
> Comparisons between classes of boats is foolish if not also accounting for if that specific craft is a good or bad seaboat. Grand Banks are wonderful, beautiful, comfortable great loop or coastal cruisers. Sea rays give great bang for the buck. Neither are designed to be or are expedition yachts.
> You can blow big bucks and get an light ice Diesel Duck 492 for less than the glorious GB but only the first is the rtw boat. You can quadruple the purchase price and walk on a Seaton or Cape Scott and get the bling with the sea keeping ability to sail the Southern ocean.
> The same occurs with monos or multis.
> 
> Looking at the title of this thread believe we should be looking at specific boats and critiqueing that specific design. Multis have several vulnerabilities as do monos or motor. This obsession about inverting limits this thread to one of many concerns so is much less informative than it could be.
> Look at the various cats you see in Caribbean charter. These are like the Searays. Even in that relatively benign setting one sees:
> They hobby horse. When motoring to windward( such as entering an anchorage) this is so extreme as to be dangerous to the occupants. Their beam to length ratio is moderate but capsize risk decreased by moderate rigs. They aim toward one level living with large expanses of glass. But a violent pooping may result in failure of the aft glass enclosure or its rim of support leading to down flooding. The steering is designed for the stresses of forward movement. Falling backwards after being stalled on the face of a wave may result in catastrophic steering failure. Interior living space is optimized for pleasant living at anchor with bridge deck forward of the mast and beam of hulls brought forward to allow a four berth set up. Beyond unpleasant burping the behavior in a seaway is compromised. They have low aspect fixed keels. Beyond decreasing ability to point increased possibilities of "tripping" on a large wave face is increased. Helm position is high and exposed. This is tiring to the helmsman and compromises ability to see the whole boat.
> 
> Now compare this to a boat designed as a seaboat. Perhaps the Rapido 60referred to above.
> Single rudder. No linkage issues. Very fine hulls and very wide beam with much more force required to turn turtle. No significant structure beyond central hull before the mast. Daggerboard no fixed keel. Protected helm station. Walkways and rig designed to be worked in a seaway. No large glass expanses vulnerable in a pooping or from green water.
> 
> In short just like a Diesel Duck would seem to be a better seaboat than a Searay the R60 would seem to be a better seaboat than the charter cat.


I see you have read Chris White's Cruising in Multihulls book. It is a good start, but is pretty dated now, and only represents a single viewpoint among many different ones from very qualified designers and builders.

I have avoided responding to some of your posts in other threads because your information is just too twisted up and poorly presented to try and untangle and add context.

But I would like to point out here that your assumptions about, and categorizing/grouping of, production catamarans and their designs is just wrong on many, many levels. I could spend a page or two just unwinding this post. Like how a good sea boat should have a single rudder, and that single rudders do not have any linkages to fail and that a very wide beam is good. Good grief - that is a general lack of understanding of catamarans, steering systems, and dynamic stability.

Production cruising catamaran designers and engineers include Morelli and Melvin, Marc Van Peteghem and Vincent Lauriot-Prévost, Eric LeRouge, Jeff Schionning, Angelo Lavranos, Phil Southwell, Alex Simonis, Kurt Hughes, and many other extremely qualified people. Many of their designs and philosophy are in contrast to Chris White's, and they have a more extensive portfolio and experience.

I suggest you take your good start at understanding catamarans and their designs (his book is where I started), and allow yourself to push further into the topic with a more open mind. A lot has developed since 1990, when Chris White wrote his book.

BTW, do you realize that more Chris White catamarans have capsized than any other builder/model? That isn't even taking into account that there are 100 times fewer Chris White boats than other builders. While the total number of catamaran capsizes while not racing is extremely small, Chris White designs do hold that record.

FWIW, I like Chris White designs.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Arcb said:


> In conditions like that it really is a good idea to slow the boat down.


I think we are all in violent agreement on this point.


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> How are you 2 saying I am stuck on APs. Somebody posted a vid of a big cruising cat surfing at 27 knots and I made one post basically saying I thought it would be foolish to leave that boat doing those speeds with an auto pilot in complete control of the boat. Then you two responded with pages of posts trying to prove me wrong, and it isnt working. I still think its foolish.
> 
> I disagree that a big cat wont broach. There are physics at play here and those physics dont necessarily point to a 60 000 lb boat doing a stern over bow somersault down a wave front. When the bow stuffs it stops, the inertia in the 60000 lb boat wants to keep going, gavity wants the stern to stay down so that inertia could result in a horizontal rotation instead of a vertical rotation, thus resulting in a broach.
> 
> I know this isnt painting a very pretty picture of some of the challenges that can be faced by some boats in heavy weather, but its how it is. In conditions like that it really is a good idea to slow the boat down. Failing slowing the boat down, at least try to keep her under control, you do that in part by steering, not all, but some broaches can be recovered from, but not generally by an autopilot.


I never posted anything trying to prove you wrong that the boat was out of control and the autopilot was handling it perfectly. I can't count the posts now where I've stated in several ways that I thought the people on that boat were foolish to be operating it that way.

I just posted a bit about modern AP's being different than older ones - more predictive and faster responses. I never stated that putting the boat in danger and then relinquishing the helm to an unsupervised AP was reasonable. You have been making that argument, not me.

I stand by what I say about broaching in a catamaran being rarer than in a mono, and pitchpoling being a greater worry. There is a huge geometry and design different between a mono and catamaran in terms of underwater appendages, control surfaces, prismatic coefficients, overall beam, and several other considerations. The reality is that a "broach" on a catamaran, if it occurs, will be gentler and more controlled than on a monohull. It will be more like a slide on a slippery driveway than falling over a cliff like a mono. Pitchpole, on the other hand, is where the catamaran design and geometry work against it.

You are also guessing that not all broaches can be prevented or recovered from under AP, and that they can under human hands. I don't subscribe to this, and doubt you have any statistics or even empirical evidence.

But again, this is completely silly because it is a stupid stunt and doesn't represent catamaran sailing at all. Not any more than a stupid stunt on a monohull represents all of mono sailing. Nor do either represent limitations of either types of boats.

The AP has nothing at all to do with anything about this. It seems like you are intentionally being argumentative.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

I continue to be amazed at the level of comfort on a cat while underway. Here is a Lagoon 400 sailing across the Indian Ocean from Cocos Keeling to Chagos...






Now, though I think Delos had better overall weather on this same passage judging by the videos - compare the level of fatigue/sickness of the crew to the above family, and keep in mind that there are 7 young and fit crew on Delos for watches, etc. - and just the mom and dad and kids on the Lagoon...






Good comparison I think. I would take the Lagoon over the Amel any day. Though I have to say, these videos make it obvious that multhull sailors can't make a good video to save their lives. I'll have to fix that.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

I was not talking hurricanes but tornadoes. Why do you bring up hurricanes?



smackdaddy said:


> On the other hand, it can be impossible to avoid [tornadoes] in JUST the right circumstance - like getting hit by lightning...especially if you're relatively close to land where thunderstorms can be far more powerful (like your example which I would equate to sailing in Galveston Bay like we used to do - but I wouldn't call that cruising).


You wouldn't call it cruising if you are 'relatively close to land'? When you are cruising you never get within the sight of land? Don't be ridiculous.



smackdaddy said:


> Now, just like lightning, had this thing been coming right at us I don't think we could have avoided it. And had we gotten a direct hit - who knows what could have happened. And, to the point I think you and others are trying to make, it would have potentially been more dangerous in a cat simply because air can get under the central platform and make the boat fly (though that's impossible to say for sure). This is what I assume happened to that other boat shown in the Florida video that was hit by the tornado - and maybe even that Prout that Noelex mentioned.


That is EXACTLY the point I was making.



smackdaddy said:


> But, I personally don't buy boats for their tornado or hurricane performance. I have no interest in that. I buy them to cruise. Our Hunter did very well on the hard in a direct strike from Category 2 Irma - and we were safe at home. But there were also a few cats in the same yard that did just as well. So, again, I'm not sure what that has to do with cruising.


Let me repeat what I said: it is IMPOSSIBLE to entirely avoid tornadoes while you are cruising, except if you are doing polar expeditions or something. Taking into account how a boat deals with potentially dangerous situations is, in my book, an essential part of good seamanship.

What does it have to do with this discussion that your Hunter was not destroyed in a hurricane while it was sitting on the hard?


----------



## SanderO

colemj said:


> I'm not sure many would want to use their AP to go to a fuel dock. We use ours for almost everything, but will dock the boat by hand. Also not sure how many would require their AP to go hard over instantly.
> 
> On the other hand, our AP has full range stop-to-stop control of the helm, and a 5 second hard over time. With a push of a single button it goes into manual mode, where holding down the buttons moves it about as fast as I can. If we had the other controller, it has a knob for steering like this.
> 
> I believe I could dock it using just the AP, but it is much easier to use the wheel based on the motion efficiency alone. Underway, if we need to dodge something, the AP can turn the boat 90* in 2-3 seconds. Our AP can auto tack and has adjustable tack times. Ours is set for 6 seconds, and it does go through tacks that fast. It could go faster, but catamarans don't tack that fast.
> 
> Mark


2-3 seconds is not fast enough in an emergency...
I don't dock with an AP... and the way I dock using reverse to kick the stern over is not possible either.
AP provides course corrections and they are very tiny in a sea way... It can tack but not hard over as the AP does not turn stop to stop...
I adapt to its limitations


----------



## Arcb

colemj said:


> I stand by what I say about broaching in a catamaran being rarer than in a mono, and pitchpoling being a greater worry. There is a huge geometry and design different between a mono and catamaran in terms of underwater appendages, control surfaces, prismatic coefficients, overall beam, and several other considerations. The reality is that a "broach" on a catamaran, if it occurs, will be gentler and more controlled than on a monohull. It will be more like a slide on a slippery driveway than falling over a cliff like a mono. Pitchpole, on the other hand, is where the catamaran design and geometry work against it.
> 
> You are also guessing that not all broaches can be prevented or recovered from under AP, and that they can under human hands. I don't subscribe to this, and doubt you have any statistics or even empirical evidence.


I am not guessing at anything here. Catamarans can and do broach and I have been there when it happens. I said a human may be better able to steer out of a broach I didnt say an auto pilot would never steer out of a broach. If I am not using absolute statements, then my meaning is not absolute. There is no need to look for hidden meanings in my posts, I am saying exactly what I am thinking.

Yes, I recognise that pitch poles are bad, I am not saying they aren't.

If you want statistical evidence on everything I post, please support everything you say with statistical information. This is a discussion forum, I am offering my opinion, if I wasnt, this would be a pretty one sided conversation.


----------



## smackdaddy

Okay Mast. 

I'm in this thread to talk about cruising cats. That's all. A couple of the capsize examples above are from hurricanes which is why I mentioned it. To be clear, I don't hold that multis are great boats for hurricanes or tornadoes regardless of where the boat is in proximity to land. 

Apart from that, I'm not interested in arguing. I'm trying to get info from multi sailors about multis.


----------



## colemj

SanderO said:


> 2-3 seconds is not fast enough in an emergency...


It is about as fast as I can turn our 46" wheel through 2 revolutions 

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

gonecrusin said:


> I've spent enough time on multi's.
> 
> Tell us, how do you handle this, on a multi, at night, with a short crew inside and sheets cleated off? Anna, Leopard and Fujin come to mind.
> 
> We're talking good and bad right?


You do exactly what he did. You ease the sheets (though he sure waited a long time to do that). But more importantly, you pay closer attention to the weather and prep your sails accordingly. The helmsman wasn't doing that. There are a million multi videos out there that show how it *should* be done.

The only correlation to Anna, Leopard and Fujin I see here is that these people were over-canvassed and reacted way too late. It sounds like that's what happened with Anna and, perhaps, Fujin since it was racing. The G4 capsize was definitely due to the same issue of not blowing the sheet at the right time. Leapoard got hit by a tornadic burst - a completely different bucket of monkeys.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> Mark - can you explain the more subtle differences in docking between a two-engine cat and a mono? I have to admit I was never the perfect docker on our mono. We always backed into slips, and ~5% of the time I would be carrying too much speed, or not aligned correctly, or whatever.
> 
> It seems you have much more fine control over a cat - both in terms of the engines, but also in terms of dealing with the momentum. Being able to literally spin the boat on a dime, and not have to mess with back-and-fill like on a mono, sounds pretty dreamy.


There is no subtle difference between the two - the difference is night and day, black and white. With two engines 20' apart, you can make the boat do a tango through a corkscrew. Strong cross winds are the only thinking one really needs to do because of the extra windage. Our catamaran made me an overnight docking expert.

Our previous monohull was a full-keel, barn door rudder, and undersized prop in an small aperature behind a thick deadwood (a real "blue water boat"). The best I could do with that boat was hang fenders everywhere and keep our liability insurance paid.

All control is done with engines while the wheel is locked in center. It is possible to use the rudders with engines to make the boat go sideways - once you get the hang of it, you can simply exit/enter a dock sideways like you have bow and stern thrusters.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Man that sounds really good. I'm so over prop-walk I can't even tell you.


----------



## Arcb

Twin screw boats still have prop walk, the difference is, you get to chose the engine and there for which way to walk your stern. You can split, which allows the boat to turn in place without advancing, you can do a reverse split that allows you to walk the boat straight sideways in either direction. You dont normally put both engines in gear in the same direction for close quarters maneuvering unless its windy, but you can. You can flare the bow like a boss with a cat and you can stop in a straight line by using both engines.

Twin screw cats really are amazing to park. The only thing better is a twin jet cat.

Any decent seamanship book will have a chapter on twin screw boat handling, Chapmans Im sure does.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> Man that sounds really good. I'm so over prop-walk I can't even tell you.


Two engines - one with right hand prop and the other with left hand. Zero prop walk, and they can be put on specific engines so that their prop walk counteracts the torque of the engine being offset when running under one engine. Most saildrives have the same gearing and ratios in fwd/rev, so this is easy to do. I don't know about shaft transmissions.

Don't see how your Hobie can have so much prop walk...

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> Don't see how your Hobie can have so much prop walk...


Hobie????? How dare you! _FIASCO!_ is, from what I've been able to find, a 1973 Spirit 17 catamaran. These were her original sails without the battens (the sails were completely trashed but I had to get a picture with them)...










Very few of these boats were made before whoever was making them went bankrupt. There's really no info about them at all. The boys and I took her from this...










to this...










Beach Cats in Rehab ? Part 1 | SMACKTALK!

I can't wait to start sailing her again in a couple of months.

So, I sail a *bespoke* beachcat - which should demand twice the price over what the lowly mass-produced Hobies and Prindles are going for these days. And the fact that we're engineless purists like the Pardeys and can easily sail on and off the dock drives that value up even more! And the fact that I, Smackdaddy, own it - we're now off the charts in value!


----------



## colemj

My mistake. I'm not used to seeing catamarans right side up. Looks like fun.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

One thing is for sure...almost 2,000 views in less than 24 hours for this thread. Sure seems to be of interest to a lot of readers.

Hopefully it can stay on track and be fun, educational, and have some of the 80 current readers posting questions and insights of their own. There are not a lot of good discussion resources out there for people interested in multihull cruising.


----------



## smackdaddy

Mark (and other multi sailors) - what is your strategy for truly heavy weather? Are you in the camp of a JSD (or equivalent) off the stern maintaining a controlled run that Hal Roth seems to advocate as the best all-round solution? Or do you prefer the drogue off the bow to avoid backing on the rudders?

Though there was seemingly a lot of confusion as to the exact problem with the rudders of the lost Alpha 42 _BE GOOD II_, I seem to recall they felt they'd been pushed backward by waves. This, in conjunction with what seems to be poor design and build of the steering system on that boat, did it in.

Just wondering.


----------



## smackdaddy

Holy crap! Speaking of BE GOOD TOO - they found her...IN SCOTLAND...3 years after she was abandoned off North Carolina after the steering failure!!










But alas, she's capsized. Heh-heh.










Obviously abandoned cats with no steering are completely unfit for voyaging several years in the North Sea.

Duly noted.


----------



## smackdaddy

In all seriousness, the story of this Alpha 42 is a cautionary tale that is applicable to this thread on many, many levels. Heavy weather, questionable decision-making, poor preparation, questionable design and construction, you name it...

http://www.wavetrain.net/news-a-views/558-helicopter-evacuation-abandoning-be-good-too

Here is the steering fix they had to try while offshore in really bad weather - using a freakin' allen wrench for a pin...










I don't think Alpha is around anymore.

Then you have the Wildcat line out of South Africa that went under because of poor building practices and customer/warrant service to address their poor quality. Remember Bumfuzzle?




























Yet, after expensive repairs, they still took this boat the rest of the way around the world.

So, lots of good and bad out there.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> Mark (and other multi sailors) - what is your strategy for truly heavy weather? Are you in the camp of a JSD (or equivalent) off the stern maintaining a controlled run that Hal Roth seems to advocate as the best all-round solution? Or do you prefer the drogue off the bow to avoid backing on the rudders?
> 
> Though there was seemingly a lot of confusion as to the exact problem with the rudders of the lost Alpha 42 _BE GOOD II_, I seem to recall they felt they'd been pushed backward by waves. This, in conjunction with what seems to be poor design and build of the steering system on that boat, did it in.
> 
> Just wondering.


Our main strategy for truly heavy weather is to stay out of it and out of the areas that create it. Our longest passages are 5-6 days, so forecasts play a large role. Most of our passages are 2-3 days, so forecasting is pretty accurate. We avoid passages through hurricane zones in hurricane season, and stay out of the North Atlantic during winter.

MarkJ gave a good accounting of how he avoids weather by using his noodle. This isn't boat-type related stuff.

If we needed to, I prefer a drogue. The JSI is probably the best for this. We have a single drogue on board. But I don't think a drogue is for truly heavy weather like tropical storms/hurricanes - it is more for slowing the boat down and keeping control in heavier weather than normal, but not crap hits the fan stuff. So far, we have only experienced 40kts on passages, and that was off the wind. Shortening sail to keep the boat speed <=8kts and letting the AP steer works fine for this. There won't be any backing on rudders when running with a drogue because you will still be going forward at 2-5kts.

The rudders on BG2 were woefully underbuilt. It was a larger boat than ours with larger rudders and used 1.37" hollow tube rudder posts with no rudder stops. For comparison, ours are 2" solid posts with stops bolted through a bulkhead. There were other problems with the steering system as well. The biggest mistake they made was taking the first boat of a brand new model design and build, pulling it out of the build shed untested, and heading straight into the North Atlantic in winter. That was just stupid.

Mark


----------



## Arcb

"Prop walk" is less perceptable on a cat or any twin screw vessel because they are rotating in opposite directions when both in use and it is made even less perceptable if there is a sail drive, but just because cats have less perceptable prop walk than mono hull sailboats doesnt mean they have no prop walk. Thats like saying outboard motors on power boats have no prop walk.


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> "Prop walk" is less perceptable on a cat or any twin screw vessel because they are rotating in opposite directions when both in use


Only if they have different handed props. Not all transmissions can be set that way.

Mark


----------



## Arcb

colemj said:


> Only if they have different handed props. Not all transmissions can be set that way.
> 
> Mark


Not a deal breaker, but it would be a worthwhile consideration when shopping for a production cat, all other things being equal, I would give preference to a model that had opposite rotations.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> Okay Mast.
> 
> I'm in this thread to talk about cruising cats. That's all. A couple of the capsize examples above are from hurricanes which is why I mentioned it. To be clear, I don't hold that multis are great boats for hurricanes or tornadoes regardless of where the boat is in proximity to land.


Most capsizes occurred NOT in hurricanes so that was just some tactics to divert attention from a real problem.

Clearly, there are quite a few cases where catamarans capsize in various high-wind conditions that have absolutely nothing to do with hurricanes. Even at anchor. This is a life-threatening situation and it is something I would take into consideration in any decision. I am not saying this danger is enough for me to never ever wanting to own or sail a cat but it it is one of several important factors.

Mind you, I have never sailed a cruising cat (that makes two of us...) and I don't have much interest in doing that. I have had some very good sailors report that sailing a cruising catamaran feels like 'sailing a Zamboni.' :devil I might appreciate it when I feel I am getting old...


----------



## smackdaddy

From the _BE GOOD TOO_ story here is more confirmation on the differences in motion/security between multis and monos (from Charlie Doane who knows a thing or two)...



> Immediately after the hit we found we had trouble controlling the boat. It seemed at the time that our loss of forward momentum had made it hard to steer, and the boat started spinning in circles, tacking and then jibing. We started up the other engine, and even with both engines running hard we could not regain control. After our second uncontrolled jibe, Hank ordered that we should drop the mainsail and lie ahull to the waves. The wind by now was blowing over 40 knots from the south and seas were running about 18-20 feet.
> 
> Frankly, this was the one point in our whole adventure where I was most nervous. I have sailed in 40 knots or more several times, but I had never before just laid to the wind and let a boat drift broadside to waves in conditions like this. I had always believed this was a bad idea and that it is best to adopt more active tactics. But the boat was very happy. The beam of the Alpha 42 (we were aboard hull no. 1, which had just been delivered to Gunther and Doris) is very wide for a cruising cat of this size, with an unusually high bridgedeck, and we had remarked earlier that the hull was very stiff and its motion was remarkably comfortable. We now were amazed at how stable it seemed lying to these large seas. The rolling was not very pronounced and only rarely did waves slap the boat or land on deck.
> 
> That afternoon we contacted our weather-router, Ken McKinley, by sat-phone and he advised that we were now south of the Gulf Stream and that we could expect the wind to increase to 45 knots before switching to the west. We continued lying to the waves through the rest of the afternoon and all of the night, during which the wind did indeed increase into the mid-40s, with gusts to over 50. Gunther later insisted he saw one hit 60.The boat, however, was still quite comfortable, and we bided our time standing watches, reading, and sleeping.


So it sounds like Alpha had done a good job with the design - just completely undercut it all with the build quality.


----------



## smj

I've posted this numerous times over the years in discussions like this and heard every response there could be, but here goes.
https://www.ssca.org/forum/viewtopi...y&sid=5473e14a5f264aae4a2f3ad4c283be58#p33869

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

Now THIS is interesting! Here is a video by the Distant Shores couple I linked to above. Their previous Southerly 48 was damaged in St. Maarten during Irma. At about 5 minutes in, she interviews Mike H. from Pantaenius Insurance who discusses the issues of insuring boats in named storms. You might be surprised what he says about cats in this situation - but will also get a bit of a reality check on what we're talking about in regards to hurricanes and why boat type matters little...






In any case, very good info regarding named-storm coverage regardless of your boat type.


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> I've posted this numerous times over the years in discussions like this and heard every response there could be, but here goes.
> https://www.ssca.org/forum/viewtopi...y&sid=5473e14a5f264aae4a2f3ad4c283be58#p33869
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Interesting poll...










Bummer that I don't see "More Seaworthy" - that would be my vote based on everything I've been seeing.


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> Interesting poll...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bummer that I don't see "More Seaworthy" - that would be my vote based on everything I've been seeing.


It's not the poll that's interesting it's the post by Sandy, an old employee of the NTSB.
When we bought our first cruising cat in 1992 I had a conversation with a Lloyds of London agent who told me they gave a slightly better rate to the Catamaran as they were less of a risk than a monohull. This study pretty much mirrors what the Lloyds of London agent told me.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> It's not the poll that's interesting it's the post by Sandy, an old employee of the NTSB.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Ah, sorry about that - this post...



> Multihull Safety
> 
> by sandy daugherty » Fri Apr 11, 2008 3:06 pm
> Escape hatches are required by law in the CE. Thats why you see them on many cats. Their desireability is open to question.
> 
> Before I retired from the NTSB I had the oportunity to study the complete Coast Guard database of boating accidents and Summary Data of proprietary actuarial information from sources within the Lloyds' Groups, with a focus on vessels with accomodations including permanent berths, head(s) and galley. I tried to exclude beach cats and tris, and daysailers by excluding boats under 24 feet. The data was not user-friendly and required a lot of external correlation because many vessels were incorrectly classified. That ultimately prevented releasing any conclusions because GI+MGI=GO (garbage in plus more garbage in still equals garbage out.) This was also a problem with the older NTSB databases that included pre-digital-age reporting. However, I discovered in the process that there were few differences between monohul and multihull rates of occurrence. That's easy to understand; human error trumps mechanical failure and design deficiency evermore. Here are some of the facts that did become apparent: Vessels designed for racing and record attempts break. Vessels built for cruising don't break. People who race drive themselves and their vessels to the limit. [please forgive the pun] Cruisers drive their homes to the next nice place.
> The rates of actual vessel loss (outside of competition) remained the same for monohulls and multihulls, over many years, with catamarans emerging slightly ahead of other vessels in the last years of available data. Reports of large numbers of catamaran roll-overs are probably anecdotal as accident statistics reveal a (slight) decline, with a slight increase in sinkings among monohulls. There was a lot of confusion in the data between catamarans and trimarans, which I can only suggest an interpretation for:
> 
> Vessels purpose built for competition are not recorded as such. Each accident had to be researched individually. Many were not insured, meaning that Insurance data would not take them into account. In fact, Many sinkings of monohulls were extremely difficult to document because they were never widely reported. This is changing as news media is becoming more interested, especially in colorful visuals.
> 
> A very small percentage of trimarans are sold for cruising, as a very small percentage of catamarans are sold for racing. The best correlation between racing and competition vessels was a ratio of lwl to mast height.
> 
> Where I was able to distinguish between cruising and competition vessels, I found that the rate of personal injuries and single fatalities was higher among monohulls. That should merit further study because those injuries appeared to occur in better weather conditions, not in worse. These accidents included cabin injuries, man-overboards, and deck injuries such as inadvertant jibes.
> 
> My conclusions were impaired by the quality of data, and my proposal of a National Transportation Safety Board Special Study was properly overshadowed by more important issues. But there is enough factual data to prove that cruising multihulls are no more, and possible less dangerous than cruising monohulls in all reported conditions of weather, traffic, and human frailty, regardless of location.


Well, there you have it.


----------



## chef2sail

We’ve chartered multi hulls twice in the Carribean. Definately like the extra room. Especially with a couple of couples on board. 

I learned on a Hobie 16 and my daughter and I raced them for a number of years in her teens and were ranked in NJ where we had one on the beach in front of our house. Sailing two hulls takes a little getting used to in seas over 6 ft no doubt. Close hulled is a technique learned. I love the increase in speed they have. 

I doubt cats will ever increase in the northeast where there are very few moorings and dock space is expensive, 
The increased cost of a cat will further divide the younger sailors from purchasing them so the demographics of the cat crowd will continue
To be the aging sailors with disposable income


Fact is one of the biggest safety feature a monohull has in increased wind is its keel and the weight in the water . I would rather be in a displacement hull than a powerboT like ride skipping like a stone across the top of the water. I don’t need a lecture about the dagger boards etc, nothing like having 7- 10,0000 lbs planted 5 ft plus under the boat.

Cats will always have a specialized niche in sailing and racing , but become the majority.....I think not.


----------



## outbound

Mark I think you’ve made multiple presumptions. At present my favorite multi is a tri the Rapido 60 as some of my prior ocean racing was on tris. I posted on the R60 on this site when it first came out giving it my highest accolades. If I had the bucks I love what Nigel Irons has drawn. I pointed out White because of his novel thinking resulting in the Mastfoil rig which I believe is one of the few wing mast setups which won’t intimidate a mom and pop cruising couple. I like the cockpit in front of the house. An idea picked up since by other architects for some years now. 
I have no issues with cats and would be delighted if you want to buy me a new Outremer. The salient point about twin rudders wasn’t that they are bad. They aren’t. Rather that it’s important they be executed in a stout manner. I have multiple friends cruising on cats and just like balanced spades on monos can have their issues if not done well the same applies on cats but with the added complexity when they’re farther apart. Hydraulics or linkages need to be spot on. I’ve listened to my colleagues discuss their experiences. 
I’ve expressed on this thread and others demeaning cats, tris or monos as being less seaworthy than another group is just plain stupid. In each group there are definitely excellent seaboats. In each group what particulars result in a good sea boat differs but there are good and bad sea boats in each group as well. If we are to discuss interesting multi designs let’s do that. If we are to discuss seaworthiness let’s try to define what features add or detract from seaworthiness in multis. Posting videos or promotional snaps isn’t informative at a devil in the details level.
The tract record of the CW boats is unfortunate. The few I know about are used for voyaging which may impact on this record. I commented on the thought that although daggerboards are more complicated they may offer an advantage over the fixed keels of Chris’ boats. Both in safety and pointing. Would you care to discuss particular boats and design features or score points? If it’s a zero sum game you want. OK you win. However, I’d be delighted if you’ll share your knowledge and experience.


----------



## smj

Chris White cats usually come with shallow mini keels to protest the rudders, running gear and to allow drying out. They also have daggerboards on the same boat.









Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## outbound

I thought the new Atlantic 49 mastfoil didn’t have boards. Am I wrong? Is that his older 55 design? 
The first multi I sailed was a CW wood epoxy tri while crewing in a Newport Bermuda. It had a daggerboard. Fast little thing but lousy motion in the absence of wind.


----------



## outbound

“Fins with adjustable flap
Two cored glass fiber fins moulded to hull bottoms, each with adjustable trailing edge flap controlled from nav station.”
From his website.

I have no experience with this feature on either mono or multi although aware of its use in early AC boats. Anyone have knowledge of this type of setup?


----------



## capecodda

colemj said:


> In absolute terms, no. On the other hand, there aren't any 40-60' cruising monohulls that sail like a Laser, only a bit more civilized.
> 
> In relative terms, there is a whole spectrum of sailing "feeling" in cruising catamarans, just like there is in monohulls. But for both types of boats, if pure sailing joy is what you are after, you will be disappointed unless you take a nice little performance sailing dinghy along with you.
> 
> Most people associate healing and riding in sync with waves while the boat moves in a certain way as their understanding of sailing "feeling". This is more a Pavlovian response, because this is how almost everyone starts in boats, and continues for a ways before moving to a catamaran. And then the move is usually to a large catamaran - where they think they are driving a dock.
> 
> Moving from a Laser, to a J35, to a Formosa 50 will give one the same experience.
> 
> However, catamarans do have their "grooves", and a lot of the joy is to be speeding along at 9-10kts with a "dock" under you, while you play guitar, cook a good meal, take a nice nap in the hammock, or pay attention to your spread of 4-6 fishing lines.
> 
> This is also a learned response over time, and going back on a mono heeled and rolling feels more like surviving than sailing.
> 
> And what one wants for an afternoon sail is completely different than what one wants for a 2-3 week passage (or even a 1-2 day passage). Sporting sailing is fun for one and can be tedious for the other.
> 
> So it depends on what you think sailing needs to "feel" like, and to what degree you will allow that to degrade before not enjoying it. Also, how you will be sailing. Again, a 50' Oyster is not going to "feel" like a Melges 24 - so there is always going to be a degradation tradeoff.
> 
> BTW, it is a very reasonable question and didn't need a disclaimer.
> 
> Mark


Hard to keep up w/this thread, unless it's your full time job .

Mark, I'm with you on some of this. A good friend once said to me that sailing a big monohull is like driving a truck, while sailing a 420 is like taking a sports car out on a track. And by the way, even at my advanced age, I still love taking out a 420 when I can and feeling that thing plane.

I've owned 5 cruising monohulls over 40 years of doing this from 22 to 52 feet. And I still found the 52 ft monohull to give me more of, OK, I'll use your words "pavlovian feel" that I'm looking for in a sailing experience than the 2 cruising multi-hull's I chartered.

Like most things in life, it isn't black and white. Bigger boats on average are more like truck driving than sports car driving. But for me, again for me, not for you and I get that, the feel at the wheel of sitting on the lee side of even a bigger monohull, beating, watching the tell tails on a big blade all fly perfectly, healing, feeling that perfect balance in the helm, for me in those moments, all is right with the world. It's just too important to me to consider going over to the other side.

I don't think you are saying this, but I think we need to be clear. The feeling of sailing a cruising cat is different than a mono hull. It's not just a size thing. If you like it, great, you are sailing in the real world, and making it happen for you.

But it ain't the solution for everyone.


----------



## capecodda

outbound said:


> "Fins with adjustable flap
> Two cored glass fiber fins moulded to hull bottoms, each with adjustable trailing edge flap controlled from nav station."
> From his website.
> 
> I have no experience with this feature on either mono or multi although aware of its use in early AC boats. Anyone have knowledge of this type of setup?


Out,

Way back in the early 90's I got a ride on an AC boat as 17th crew. Oh yea, during the dark ages when AC was monohulls and no one wore helmets . Don't ask me why I deserved this amount of fun, because I didn't. Right place, right time I guess.

I recall an inner wheel at the helm that could adjust the tab. I don't think that they played with it much, but I always assumed it was like flaps on an airplane, that would make sense to deploy at lower speeds to get more lift and would be turned straight at higher speed for less drag. Lift would translate to leeway.

And no, they didn't let me play with this or anything else, just go for the ride. Those carbon AC machines sure are noisy with lots of groans and a pile of stuff sounding wicked stressed. Pretty exciting for a mono .


----------



## smj

capecodda said:


> Hard to keep up w/this thread, unless it's your full time job .
> 
> Mark, I'm with you on some of this. A good friend once said to me that sailing a big monohull is like driving a truck, while sailing a 420 is like taking a sports car out on a track. And by the way, even at my advanced age, I still love taking out a 420 when I can and feeling that thing plane.
> 
> I've owned 5 cruising monohulls over 40 years of doing this from 22 to 52 feet. And I still found the 52 ft monohull to give me more of, OK, I'll use your words "pavlovian feel" that I'm looking for in a sailing experience than the 2 cruising multi-hull's I chartered.
> 
> Like most things in life, it isn't black and white. Bigger boats on average are more like truck driving than sports car driving. But for me, again for me, not for you and I get that, the feel at the wheel of sitting on the lee side of even a bigger monohull, beating, watching the tell tails on a big blade all fly perfectly, healing, feeling that perfect balance in the helm, for me in those moments, all is right with the world. It's just too important to me to consider going over to the other side.
> 
> I don't think you are saying this, but I think we need to be clear. The feeling of sailing a cruising cat is different than a mono hull. It's not just a size thing. If you like it, great, you are sailing in the real world, and making it happen for you.
> 
> But it ain't the solution for everyone.


I think quite a bit depends on the catamaran your sailing. You can't compare the feeling of sailing say a Morgan OI to a J boat of similar length. 
The type cat you sailed on charter would most likely be one designed for the charter market. There's no comparison sailing one of these as compared to a performance Catamaran.
However, if I were just daysailing I would own a smallish performance monohull but for cruising no doubt a catamaran as the heeling for me gets very tiresome over time.
Please note, I said "for me" as I realize there are quite a lot of people who enjoy the heeling over long periods.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## SanderO

After reading much of this interesting thread as with many discussions comparing different "platforms" it comes down to the difficulty of comparing applies and oranges. Of course since there are SO MANY variables... it's way way more complex that comparing two fruits.

And let's not forget all the psychological factors which inform our opinions and feelings about things. This aspect is quite "irrational" and so it becomes a fool's errand to claim A "feels better" than B.

And even on the technical attributes which can be compared... one's assignment of priority is yet another variable. And each factor / design attribute has an up and down side.

Cats are popular and rightly so for term charter in the tropics. These are perfect platforms for large groups of people / families desiring a shared vacation. But the size may make little sense for the single handed or couple cruising up north who mostly go out on the water for the week end or club racing.

Cats are excellent solutions for some sets of criteria and not so for others. My sense is their success is largely driven by term charter and families who want to go for long term cruising through the tropics. They will not likely overtake monos in the temperate clients, more crowded with limited docking compared to demand.


----------



## colemj

capecodda said:


> I don't think you are saying this, but I think we need to be clear. The feeling of sailing a cruising cat is different than a mono hull.


That is exactly what I was saying. I just furthered the point that the "feeling" on a monohull being associated with "sailing" is a learned response, and a similar learned response is gained over time on a catamaran. Once acclimated, going between the two seems strange, although one can enjoy both for what they give.

Mark


----------



## capecodda

To Sander's point, I think that it is the irrational, intangible, perceptual stuff that is the most important.

Sailing doesn't make any sense. Why would you sail anywhere? If you've got a decent sized cruising boat, it would be cheaper and faster to fly first class on a 747 that goes to weather pretty nicely.

You do it for esthetics, for feel, for how it makes you feel, to feel the spray, to listen to the sea birds, to trim the sails just right, to turn the engine off and hear and feel and....

If you just want a big party platform when you get there, a power boat would work just fine. 

But if you are here, there is something else going on for you. Not just getting there, the process of getting there using an old fashioned, slow, conveyance. It must have something to do with how that feels to you. 

And it's precisely that fools errand that we are all engaged in discussing.


----------



## capecodda

colemj said:


> That is exactly what I was saying. I just furthered the point that the "feeling" on a monohull being associated with "sailing" is a learned response, and a similar learned response is gained over time on a catamaran. Once acclimated, going between the two seems strange, although one can enjoy both for what they give.
> 
> Mark


I get that Mark, but I tried, admittedly for only a couple of weeks on some charter cats, and I was unsuccessful at learning this new response. Maybe it takes more time, maybe I'm too old, maybe those charter boats aren't good examples but I'm not a convert.

I just don't like how they feel under sail. I think everyone's mileage varies on this account, and I understand that cat enthusiasts clearly feel different. But feel is feel, it's not rational. But feel, is the reason I sail.


----------



## outbound

Gentlemen - I think we’re all over the place comparing apples to oranges between and in groups.
Even back in the day phrf racing you were taught “flat is fast”. Now you have a production builder selling monoramarans whatever the hell that is. Even my boat is happiest at ~20 degrees. More you just start digging a hole to leeward. Rail down is exciting but clearly time to reef as it’s slower. Current ocean monos with flatter runs like some heeling to be sure and need it to get best speed but again don’t like to be spilling air over the top of the square head. The ride is different than an Erik derived hull it’s not tender at first and then stiffens up but rather very stable once there’s a bone in her teeth at modest heel.
Ocean performance cats have a different issue. Being so fast aws progressively rises once the rags are up. With that awa progressively falls. After you’re going awhile you reef and tighten up. You may even need to do that again even in moderate air. 
Experience is different. You’re on more of a beat ( relative to the wind not the sea) in higher wind if sailing to the performance envelope. There’s no “better” with this. It’s just different. Some find being on deck at a beat at higher speeds in higher wind tiring. Others find it delightful. Many cats have inside steering which is less likely to be available on monos so that’s another variable. Similarly comparing a Prout with its tiny blade main to a modern fractional or rotating mast rigged cat is like comparing a Westsail to a Pogo.
Agree with smj that we should talk more specifically as sometimes generalizations obscure relevant information.


----------



## colemj

SanderO said:


> Cats are popular and rightly so for term charter in the tropics. These are perfect platforms for large groups of people / families desiring a shared vacation. But the size may make little sense for the single handed or couple cruising up north who mostly go out on the water for the week end.
> 
> Cats are excellent solutions for some sets of criteria and not so for others. My sense is their success is largely driven by term charter and families who want to go for long term cruising through the tropics. They will not likely overtake monos in the temperate clients, more crowded with limited docking compared to demand.


I have been trying to point to how these statements are incorrect, and reflect only localized observations being stated as absolutes - and I think Smackdaddy has been doing similar by posting videos and blogs of people out cruising on catamarans.

Yes, the charter market has a lot of catamarans. They also have at least equal numbers of monohulls, and most likely greater numbers of monohulls.

There are many, many, many, people cruising on catamarans long term and long distance, and few of them are larger families. Right now, we are in an anchorage with 5 cruising catamarans and 1 monohull. The cruising cats consist of one single hander and four couples. The majority, by far, of cruising catamarans we meet are owned by couples. They are also a better platform for families, but the number of families out cruising in any type of boat is pretty low.

These are real observations from New England throughout the entire Caribbean, South, and Central America. Chesapeake Bay and New England during the summer get many catamarans cruising there, but they leave with the seasons - just as they previously left tropic climates during the summer season. I've already agreed that catamarans are not good solutions for short term seasonal sailing with winter layups. However, New England has already increased dramatically in full-time catamarans in its waters being used in this manner. Nobody said they would become the predominant type of boat there, but I don't see why that topic is even interesting or what point it is trying to make.

Mark


----------



## colemj

capecodda said:


> To Sander's point, I think that it is the irrational, intangible, perceptual stuff that is the most important.
> 
> Sailing doesn't make any sense. Why would you sail anywhere? If you've got a decent sized cruising boat, it would be cheaper and faster to fly first class on a 747 that goes to weather pretty nicely.
> 
> You do it for esthetics, for feel, for how it makes you feel, to feel the spray, to listen to the sea birds, to trim the sails just right, to turn the engine off and hear and feel and....
> 
> If you just want a big party platform when you get there, a power boat would work just fine.
> 
> But if you are here, there is something else going on for you. Not just getting there, the process of getting there using an old fashioned, slow, conveyance. It must have something to do with how that feels to you.
> 
> And it's precisely that fools errand that we are all engaged in discussing.


Some of us are cruising full time enjoying different cultures and a different lifestyle. Our choice of boat was more logical to us, rather than a "feeling" or something irrational or intangible. We certainly could not afford to do this by flying (even coach), and have spent lots of time in places inaccessible to anyone without a boat.

Mark


----------



## colemj

capecodda said:


> I get that Mark, but I tried, admittedly for only a couple of weeks on some charter cats, and I was unsuccessful at learning this new response. Maybe it takes more time, maybe I'm too old, maybe those charter boats aren't good examples but I'm not a convert.
> 
> I just don't like how they feel under sail. I think everyone's mileage varies on this account, and I understand that cat enthusiasts clearly feel different. But feel is feel, it's not rational. But feel, is the reason I sail.


To put this in balance, many initiates to sailing monohulls spend years getting used to being heeled and rolling and how they feel under sail. Many wives won't go out on them anymore for this reason.

But I don't begrudge what you want out of a sailing feel - just adding to my case that it is a learned association and not an innate one.

Mark


----------



## outbound

CC appreciate your post but must say there’s something incredibly pleasant about being on a heavy displacement trawler ( think Norhavn, Selene, Diesel Duck) with the engine softly ticking over just trucking along offshore. Again this speaks to preconceived ideas leading to entrenched likes and dislikes that aren’t logical. As said to Mikey “try it...you’ll like it”.


----------



## SanderO

colemj said:


> I've already agreed that catamarans are not good solutions for short term seasonal sailing with winter layups. However, New England has already increased dramatically in full-time catamarans in its waters being used in this manner. Nobody said they would become the predominant type of boat there, but I don't see why that topic is even interesting or what point it is trying to make.
> 
> Mark


Mark... Cats will not replace the mono in the colder high population areas as the boat of choice for RECREATIONAL USE. And recreational use is what the VAST majority of boats are used for in these regions.

Please go to google maps.... satellite view for NorthPort NY.. you can see more than a thousand moored boats... only 1 cat.... and none in the huge Britannia Marina.

THIS tells the story. NPT is 50 miles from NYC accessible to millions of people... a beautiful protected harbor... with lots of wealth and lots of middle and working class... The one guy who bought a Cat named Lamoka used to have a Contest 36s hahahaha

Cats will make very little market penetration where the vast majority of people live and use boats for recreational purposes.

Do cats pass through in season? YES when the scurry out of the hurricane zones... live aboards...

I do not dislike cats for some uses.... I do not like them for others... and all people are the same... they have to hot all the right notes and be affordable for their play.... if not they find something wbich is.


----------



## smj

SanderO said:


> Mark... Cats will not replace the mono in the colder high population areas as the boat of choice for RECREATIONAL USE. And recreational use is what the VAST majority of boats are used for in these regions.
> 
> Please go to google maps.... satellite view for NorthPort NY.. you can see more than a thousand moored boats... only 1 cat.... and none in the huge Britannia Marina.
> 
> THIS tells the story. NPT is 50 miles from NYC accessible to millions of people... a beautiful protected harbor... with lots of wealth and lots of middle and working class... The one guy who bought a Cat named Lamoka used to have a Contest 36s hahahaha
> 
> Cats will make very little market penetration where the vast majority of people live and use boats for recreational purposes.
> 
> Do cats pass through in season? YES when the scurry out of the hurricane zones... live aboards...
> 
> I do not dislike cats for some uses.... I do not like them for others... and all people are the same... they have to hot all the right notes and be affordable for their play.... if not they find something wbich is.


Sounds to me your saying cats are used as cruising boats and don't hang in one spot long?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> I commented on the thought that although daggerboards are more complicated they may offer an advantage over the fixed keels of Chris' boats. Both in safety and pointing. Would you care to discuss particular boats and design features or score points? If it's a zero sum game you want. OK you win. However, I'd be delighted if you'll share your knowledge and experience.


Geez, I thought all along I was attempting to share my knowledge and experience. I have responded to most posts, attempting to provide these aspects, but some of your posts were pretty dense with inaccuracies and unexamined biases that it would just take way too much effort to untangle them and put all of the individual points in perspective with knowledge and experience. If you care to bring forth more concise topics in a more open manner, I'd be happy to contribute.

I do attempt to respond to single issues, or posts with just a couple of issues, and I won't wade into intentional trolling threads, or topics I see as just picking fights. I differ from some here in this way.

AFAIK, fixed keels are a very recent thing with Chris White, and only exist on the one model. All previous designs have been daggerboards, and Chris White has been a daggerboard advocate since he started. Please don't take this the wrong way, but this is just a small example of how you are running with "knowledge" that you don't really have. This is why I urged you to do some more research before posting in such absolute terms, and even provided references to current production boat designers.

If you are interested in some perspective on daggerboards and LAR keels, Tony Grainger and Eric LeRouge built boats with each, and have some thoughts as to the tradeoffs: https://www.graingerdesigns.net/the-lab/daggerboards-vs-fixed-keels/ 
Erik Lerouge

Mark


----------



## capecodda

Out,

I agree, but I have tried it. For offshore fishing we run a 28 down east at 18-20 knots to get out 50 miles or so at a reasonable level of comfort. But the goal of that activity is to get to the place we want to put lines in the water as comfortably and fast as possible, because the fun really starts when the lines go in. The goal of a powerboat, for me at least, is to get there.

I've helped deliver some heavy displacement trawlers, and like running in relatively flat seas in the rain and fog while sipping a hot drink with the heat on glancing down at the radar. Some light air days in Maine in the fog/drizzle with rain gear in the cockpit of my little sailboat, I think, gee, a trawler would be nice. But then I remember the sunny day's beating into a 15-20 knot SW in Vineyard Sound, and the desire passes.

But for me, and that's the point here, for me, and not for you, I find trawlers comfortable, but not fun. 

Let's also be clear, I'm not a full time live aboard, and never will be. I tried it, I get board. So my priorities are the experience of sailing for a few weeks at a time or even an afternoon. I'd probably think different about these priorities if I was to spend many months or years aboard, or do the passages you do from up here to the Caribbean. But I don't, and don't want to.

We all put our biases based on the way we use our boats into these discussions. I don't think there's a right and wrong way to waste your money on boats, there are just preferences based on how we each use them, and what part of the experience is most important to each of us.

And I also think, for those of us in the northlands, that threads like this give us something to do until the weather gets good .


----------



## SanderO

smj said:


> Sounds to me your saying cats are used as cruising boats and don't hang in one spot long?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


or for term charter... that is my impression... correct.


----------



## colemj

SanderO said:


> Mark... Cats will not replace the mono in the colder high population areas as the boat of choice for RECREATIONAL USE.


Again, I don't see why that topic is even interesting or what point it is trying to make.

The original point was the rapidly increasing global popularity and sales of catamarans. Some immediately took this topic and fearfully denied it based on looking out their local window, or claiming it is because of unwashed charterers, or because they are only large families cruising.

I attempted to bring perspective is all. I never stated that catamarans will be the predominant boat type in New England - in fact, I specifically stated they would not be, and gave good reasons.

But for some reason, you and others keep telling me I claim the opposite, and see my postings as supporting this falsehood.

But the real issue is that I don't see why this topic of catamarans in New England is even interesting or what point it is trying to make. For example, the Caribbean and Med are full of superyachts, but they are rare as local boats in New England outside of seasonal cruising. Does this mean that superyachts are not popular or not a large segment of the boating economy? Does it say anything about their relative numbers among boats being built?

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> Geez, I thought all along I was attempting to share my knowledge and experience. I have responded to most posts, attempting to provide these aspects, but some of your posts were pretty dense with inaccuracies and unexamined biases that it would just take way too much effort to untangle them and put all of the individual points in perspective with knowledge and experience. If you care to bring forth more concise topics in a more open manner, I'd be happy to contribute.
> 
> I do attempt to respond to single issues, or posts with just a couple of issues, and I won't wade into intentional trolling threads, or topics I see as just picking fights. I differ from some here in this way.
> 
> AFAIK, fixed keels are a very recent thing with Chris White, and only exist on the one model. All previous designs have been daggerboards, and Chris White has been a daggerboard advocate since he started. Please don't take this the wrong way, but this is just a small example of how you are running with "knowledge" that you don't really have. This is why I urged you to do some more research before posting in such absolute terms, and even provided references to current production boat designers.
> 
> If you are interested in some perspective on daggerboards and LAR keels, Tony Grainger and Eric LeRouge built boats with each, and have some thoughts as to the tradeoffs: https://www.graingerdesigns.net/the-lab/daggerboards-vs-fixed-keels/
> Erik Lerouge
> 
> Mark


Chris White has been using fixed keels in conjunction with daggerboards for years.








A great picture of the Atlantic 57 Anna during spring cleaning!








And Resolute, an Atlantic 48.
He also has a 54' design with keels that was built in 1994.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

capecodda said:


> And I also think, for those of us in the northlands, that threads like this give us something to do until the weather gets good .


AHA! This is the best explanation for some of these posts that I have heard! I completely forgot that not everyone is sitting in pleasant, sunny, warm weather with crystal clear water.

My excuse is that we just dropped off the in-laws from a visit and are recovering doing laundry, shopping, etc before heading somewhere more interesting for a while.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> Some of us are cruising full time enjoying different cultures and a different lifestyle. Our choice of boat was more logical to us, rather than a "feeling" or something irrational or intangible. We certainly could not afford to do this by flying (even coach), and have spent lots of time in places inaccessible to anyone without a boat.
> 
> Mark


After reading through these comments I honestly think the disconnect is the difference in perspective between those that actually cruise full-time and those that sail seasonally. If you're cruising most months of the year it's really hard to argue against a multi. If you're not, it doesn't make sense to you.

I think we covered this in detail in the Oyster thread, but I suppose it needs to be said again.


----------



## smj

SanderO said:


> or for term charter... that is my impression... correct.


I agree

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> Chris White has been using fixed keels in conjunction with daggerboards for years.
> 
> A great picture of the Atlantic 57 Anna during spring cleaning!
> 
> And Resolute, an Atlantic 48.
> He also has a 54' design with keels that was built in 1994.


Yes, but those fixed keels are very short and not intended as the main foils like full LAR keel boats (they are just 11" on the Atlantic 42, for example). He describes them mostly as a device to overcome some of the practical shortcomings of pure daggerboards for cruising boats. The keel on the 57 is 3', I believe, which is very short for that size boat.

He only recently moved to a pure LAR keel design without daggers at all.

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> Yes, but those fixed keels are very short and not intended as the main foils like full LAR keel boats (they are just 11" on the Atlantic 42, for example). He describes them mostly as a device to overcome some of the practical shortcomings of pure daggerboards for cruising boats. The keel on the 57 is 3', I believe, which is very short for that size boat.
> 
> He only recently moved to a pure LAR keel design without daggers at all.
> 
> Mark


Yes, mainly used to protect rudders, running gear and to be able to take the ground easily.
I thought his 54' design built in 1994 was just minikeels. I could be wrong, or it could be it was designed for daycharters.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

I'm only aware of the Superior 54 by him, and that was definitely daggerboard, unless he also designed a special version of it.

Mark


----------



## smj

That's the design. There was one for sale in the Bahamas a month or so ago, it definitely had mini keels but don't remember daggerboards. It was used as a day charter boat.


----------



## smj

Found it.
http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/1994/Custom-Catamaran-3165468/Bradford-Marine-Bahamas/Bahamas
Keels and daggerboards.


----------



## colemj

Again, I would argue that the main purpose of those keels is protection and not foils.

Personally, I like the concept and would prefer a dagger boat to use it. I never have a good feeling seeing rudders and saildrives several feet below the hull on many dagger boats. The extra drag of short keels doesn't appear to be so bad.

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> Again, I would argue that the main purpose of those keels is protection and not foils.
> 
> Personally, I like the concept and would prefer a dagger boat to use it. I never have a good feeling seeing rudders and saildrives several feet below the hull on many dagger boats. The extra drag of short keels doesn't appear to be so bad.
> 
> Mark


I completely agree with you.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Minnewaska

One difference I've begun to notice, between mono-hulls and multi-hulls, is multi hull owners are very sensitive and defensive of their choice. Maybe it's because mono-hull owners are unenlightened and misinformed, but it sure seems to run deeper than that. 

It's typical of human club dynamics. Identify a minority (and yes, multis are still a global minority, which is different from being the fastest growing segment) and that minority is often on the look out for discrimination or criticism. In fact, some personalities are drawn to the minority, because they love being different and arguing about it. Kind of like a NY Jet's or Met's fan.


----------



## colemj

Minnewaska said:


> One difference I've begun to notice, between mono-hulls and multi-hulls, is multi hull owners are very sensitive and defensive of their choice. Maybe it's because mono-hull owners are unenlightened and misinformed, but it sure seems to run deeper than that.
> 
> It's typical of human club dynamics. Identify a minority (and yes, multis are still a global minority, which is different from being the fastest growing segment) and that minority is often on the look out for discrimination or criticism. In fact, some personalities are drawn to the minority, because they love being different and arguing about it. Kind of like a NY Jet's or Met's fan.


The problem with your argument is that SMJ and I are the only actual multihull owners posting on this thread (if you exclude beach cats). Maybe PDQ32 (Drew, I don't remember his current avatar name) also posted here. If you would like to point out specific posts of ours that are sensitive and defensive, that might be more helpful. Both of us have attempted to add knowledge and experience to specific points and have mostly stayed out of the silly stuff. Both of us have owned monohulls, and neither of us have damned them in any way.

Using your logic and direction, it is typical human dynamics for a majority to view an emerging minority as a threat and to suppress that minority using false information and sweeping generalization.

But that doesn't sound like you, does it? So why are you projecting a similar line of reasoning on others? Please save the pop psychology for another forum. If you have an issue with Jeff H's thread here, and the specific topics he wished discussed, either stay out of it or take it up with him.

Speaking of interesting pop psychology, who starts, and participates in, the troll threads like capsizing multis, and who stays completely out of them?

Interesting indeed. Hope you kept your day job.

Mark


----------



## outbound

Good link. Thanks.
Can see why for cruising fixed keels may have benefits for cats but would think in a tri there’s no other reasonable choice than a board. I’ve never seen a centerboard on a decent sized tri only a daggerboard. Is there a reason?


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> I've never seen a centerboard on a decent sized tri only a daggerboard. Is there a reason?


Probably interior space intrusion and the supporting structure can't be balanced against a bulkhead well, so requires additional engineering. Daggers are also higher performance, and usually lighter and simpler to build and maintain.

Mark


----------



## smj

outbound said:


> Good link. Thanks.
> 
> Can see why for cruising fixed keels may have benefits for cats but would think in a tri there's no other reasonable choice than a board. I've never seen a centerboard on a decent sized tri only a daggerboard. Is there a reason?


All Searunner trimarans are designed with centerboards.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## guitarguy56

colemj said:


> The problem with your argument is that SMJ and I are the only actual multihull owners posting on this thread (if you exclude beach cats). Maybe PDQ32 (Drew, I don't remember his current avatar name) also posted here. If you would like to point out specific posts of ours that are sensitive and defensive, that might be more helpful. Both of us have attempted to add knowledge and experience to specific points and have mostly stayed out of the silly stuff. Both of us have owned monohulls, and neither of us have damned them in any way.
> 
> Using your logic and direction, it is typical human dynamics for a majority to view an emerging minority as a threat and to suppress that minority using false information and sweeping generalization.
> 
> But that doesn't sound like you, does it? So why are you projecting a similar line of reasoning on others? Please save the pop psychology for another forum. If you have an issue with Jeff H's thread here, and the specific topics he wished discussed, either stay out of it or take it up with him.
> 
> Speaking of interesting pop psychology, who starts, and participates in, the troll threads like capsizing multis, and who stays completely out of them?
> 
> Interesting indeed. Hope you kept your day job.
> 
> Mark


Mark... About time you placed the trolls where they belong!

Smack and you guys are placing the facts they don't like in their face and they resent it.

Nick


----------



## smj

Minnewaska said:


> One difference I've begun to notice, between mono-hulls and multi-hulls, is multi hull owners are very sensitive and defensive of their choice. Maybe it's because mono-hull owners are unenlightened and misinformed, but it sure seems to run deeper than that.
> 
> It's typical of human club dynamics. Identify a minority (and yes, multis are still a global minority, which is different from being the fastest growing segment) and that minority is often on the look out for discrimination or criticism. In fact, some personalities are drawn to the minority, because they love being different and arguing about it. Kind of like a NY Jet's or Met's fan.


We bought our first cruising cat well before they became popular and had to constantly put up with the occasional abuse from the grey beard.
You know the grey beard right? Has a grey beard, a big heavy full keeled monohull with miles of teak on the outside. They always seemed to take the time in between varnishing sessions to berate my choice of boat and to tell me they couldn't be sailed offshore. I actually had one of those fellows stop by last week! Their lack of education in the matter still amazes me.
Funny thing, quite a few of those old grey beards from years back now own catamarans or are in the market!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Minnewaska

colemj said:


> ......If you would like to point out specific posts of ours that are sensitive and defensive, that might be more helpful.


How about this one, ironically? I'm delighted that you're sharing your experience and knowledge. But some posters have felt the need to provide "disclaimers" before you jump on them.



> Interesting indeed. Hope you kept your day job.


Sensitive and defensive. Note that I never called you out specifically, nor kept track of who does and doesn't own a cat. Just back it down a notch and everyone would pay more attention and contribute more.


----------



## colemj

Well, I'm not attempting to do anything really. I think I am presenting more perspective and experience than facts - because much of this stuff isn't about facts per se (like Capecodda's questions and opinions). I have tried to shut down unexamined biases, sweeping generalizations, and bad logic by using reasoning.

It is funny that I get accused of being sensitive about catamarans on this thread, while taking heat for supporting a monohull on another thread.

Maybe the posse could just post a list of acceptable topics and responses so we don't run afoul of them so often?

Mark


----------



## Minnewaska

smj said:


> We bought our first cruising cat well before they became popular and had to constantly put up with the occasional abuse from the grey beard.


Sure do. Just like fin keels, spade rudders, production boats and structural liners.


----------



## colemj

Minnewaska said:


> Note that I never called you out specifically, nor kept track of who does and doesn't own a cat. Just back it down a notch and everyone would pay more attention and contribute more.


You specifically called out the multihull owners here. That encompasses, in total, me and SMJ. How do you think you were being non-specific there?

If you were attributing those statements to others who do not own catamarans, then the fault is yours, and your statement is incorrect.

Everyone isn't paying attention and contributing because of me? Funny, this is currently the most active thread in the forums and looking to become one of the most active and viewed overall in Sailnet.

You will need to work harder to find where I need to "back it down a notch". Citing only responses with a bit of juice to your provocations is hardly evidence of a thread-wide behavior.

Mark


----------



## Minnewaska

colemj said:


> ....Maybe the posse.....


Quite a brand you picked up on.


----------



## colemj

Minnewaska said:


> Quite a brand you picked up on.


Quite sensitive are we?

Mark


----------



## colemj

BTW, that is not a term I understood for a very long time. I only came around to it by thinking of it myself when reading some of behaviors in the posts and threads from the same group of posters, and realized that it was being used by Smackdaddy as a descriptor he felt apt for those posters.

I was a bit horrified by that discovery and attempted to realign my thoughts and read with a bit more of an open mind. I doubled my efforts to stay out of certain threads and topics, and address honest questions and opinions as neutrally as I can. I have disagreed with SanderO and many others on certain topics, and agreed and supported them on others. I have done so with you, and with Outbound, as other examples.

However, I now believe Smackdaddy nailed it. He might reasonably be accused of similar actions, but that does not exonerate the "posse" from bad behavior.

Maybe some of you should read with a bit more of an open mind as to why some of us may think this way (and there is no pop psychology necessary to understand it).

Mark


----------



## Arcb

Interesting that some of the owners of cruising cats consider themselves to be the only real multi hull owners on this thread. Quite the club mentality. I didn't know this thread was specific to cruising cats only.


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> Interesting that some of the owners of cruising cats consider themselves to be the only real multi hull owners on this thread. Quite the club mentality. I didn't know this thread was specific to cruising cats only.


If that was addressed to me, I didn't say or imply any such thing. When "multihull owners" was used to make a point, I pointed out that if beach cat owners were excluded, there were only two of us posting here. I excluded beach cats, and I guess by default power cats, because the posting was pointedly at cruising cat owners.

If you feel slighted by this, I apologize, but do warn that you will be slapped with the "sensitive" and "defensive" labels, as I was.

The thread topic is specifically multihull cruising boats, btw. Check the OP's first post.

Mark

Edit: If you were implying some slight of mine to trimarans, I didn't mean to do that either. To my knowledge, we haven't had a cruising trimaran owner post here yet, and all the discussion has been around cruising catamarans. Cruising tri's are even a minority among the multihull minority. If the Rapido is set aside, along with smaller tris, the Neel and largest Dragonfly is the only current production cruising tri I'm aware of.

Edit to my edit: I also didn't mean to slight proas or quadramarans. Or monomarans.


----------



## SanderO

OK gents... the ad homs are just not acceptable. Please by all means have opinions about anything boating informed by your personal experience and media exposure... All fine. I don't feel compelled to support any sub set... and I don't identify with any subset. I am only an expert on MY boat and MY experience... everything else is my OPINION. I think most of the old salts... here are intelligent enough to understand pros and cons especially when they are evidence based... as distinguished from opinion based.

Cats are of little interest to me in the sense of a "next boat". There will be no next boat. I have little to no interest in chartering a boat anywhere... and so mono or cat charters are just observations from living in the Caribe for some years on Shiva. 

I am interested in all technical developments which could be of use to me whether on cats or monos... and simply expanding my knowledge base from reading what the members write.

Thank you!


----------



## outbound

Beyond the Jim Brown boats are there any current tri designs or tris in production that are center boards?
Would note a friend who sells Corsair in Wareham MA loaned us one for a week. They are a totally blast and quite seaworthy but at 37’ perhaps not everyones idea of a live aboard.it had a daggerboard. So think Mark is right as regards series built boats so the question is asked to include one offs as well.
As a side question. I’ve sailed a B40 on several passages and in light air the board knocked with no apparent rhythm. It was very annoying. Is this much of an issue with daggerboards in modern multis?


----------



## capta

smackdaddy said:


> You certainly don't owe me an apology. .


I think you misunderstood. My apology was not directed to you.


----------



## smj

outbound said:


> Beyond the Jim Brown boats are there any current tri designs or tris in production that are center boards?
> Would note a friend who sells Corsair in Wareham MA loaned us one for a week. They are a totally blast and quite seaworthy but at 37' perhaps not everyones idea of a live aboard.it had a daggerboard. So think Mark is right as regards series built boats so the question is asked to include one offs as well.
> As a side question. I've sailed a B40 on several passages and in light air the board knocked with no apparent rhythm. It was very annoying. Is this much of an issue with daggerboards in modern multis?


The old Telstar 28 have center boards. Also appears the Dragonfly trimarans have centerboards.


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> I've sailed a B40 on several passages and in light air the board knocked with no apparent rhythm. It was very annoying. Is this much of an issue with daggerboards in modern multis?


SMJ has more experience with dagger cats than I do, but for the ones I have been on, some do and some don't. I think it has more to do with their specific position in the trunk at any time, and when pulled up (at anchor, for example), they often have a chock built in or ready to put in to prevent clunking. When down underway, they are pretty loaded up, so that keeps them from moving much. I imagine design precision and the actual shapes matter too.

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> SMJ has more experience with dagger cats than I do, but for the ones I have been on, some do and some don't. I think it has more to do with their specific position in the trunk at any time, and when pulled up (at anchor, for example), they often have a chock built in or ready to put in to prevent clunking. When down underway, they are pretty loaded up, so that keeps them from moving much. I imagine design precision and the actual shapes matter too.
> 
> Mark


I have about the same experience as you, only sailed them a few times but never owned one........yet

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> I have about the same experience as you, only sailed them a few times but never owned one........yet


You told me you were done buying any more catamarans two boats ago.

Mark


----------



## colemj

capta said:


> I think you misunderstood. My apology was not directed to you.


I must have missed a page. Is this exchange in this thread somewhere?

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> You told me you were done buying any more catamarans two boats ago.
> 
> Mark


I think I told you that after we purchased this boat, and I stand by that quote. We have owned this cat for 2.5 years, almost a record for us! We really like this cat and it was super affordable for us and I'm getting to old and worn out to take on another project. Though I did hear of a nice one that may be hitting the market soon.......

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

I remember you telling me that when you sold your old boat in Stuart - before your current one!

So you are bidding on that Superior 54? Looks like all it needs is a buff job and a dusting...

Mark


----------



## Minnewaska

I've seen a variety of helm locations on cats. There are dual helms at each side, there is the helm that sticks up through the aft deck roof and there is the big center helm up some stairs that sits above the salon. 

Is one over the other considered a better design for long distance cruising? It would seem to me that being way up high is a longer pendulum, while in steep tight waves. I understand it won't move like a mono, but I'm asking about sea state that is moving the boat around.

I've also seen helms in the salon, but I've not seen line control in there. In rough weather, I assume one doesn't sail from in there.


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> I remember you telling me that when you sold your old boat in Stuart - before your current one!
> 
> So you are bidding on that Superior 54? Looks like all it needs is a buff job and a dusting...
> 
> Mark


Hmmmm, that would have left me boat less, I must have been drinking heavily that day! 
No bids on the Superior, way to big for us and way to much work. We are currently still really enjoying our current catamaran. The size works well for us and she performs well.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

Minnewaska said:


> I've seen a variety of helm locations on cats. There are dual helms at each side, there is the helm that sticks up through the aft deck roof and there is the big center helm up some stairs that sits above the salon.
> 
> Is one over the other considered a better design for long distance cruising? It would seem to me that being way up high is a longer pendulum, while in steep tight waves. I understand it won't move like a mono, but I'm asking about sea state that is moving the boat around.
> 
> I've also seen helms in the salon, but I've not seen line control in there. In rough weather, I assume one doesn't sail from in there.


Helm positions! Now you are intentionally being provocative! Better duck for cover after bringing up this topic, as it splits up catamaran owners like nothing other.

Before continuing, you missed a couple of options - forward cockpit helms, raised bulkhead helms looking through a dodger, lower bulkhead helms looking through the entire boat, and center helms in the middle of the "cabin" (different from the saloon helms you mention because they are the sole helm and sail controls are located there).

Personally, I think whatever floats one's boat is fine as regards to this. I do have my preference, and also highly dislike some - though I'm not sure any particular helm position would be a deal breaker for me if the rest of the boat was screaming to me.

They all have advantages and disadvantages, and owners of each will see these differently. I'm not going to be the one to start on this, but I think I can safely state a couple of aspects that everyone would agree to:

Helms in the aft cockpit take space from the cockpit.
Helms in the saloon take space from the saloon.
Helms in a forward cockpit can be wet and difficult to protect from the weather.
Helms in the aft corners can be difficult to protect from the weather and can be wet in rougher conditions.
Flybridge helms can cause difficult communication and are not easy to reach immediately if necessary. They are also difficult to protect from weather. The boom must be raised for them, and can be difficult to reach/work on.
Raised helms are an attempt to strike a balance among all, but can be somewhat difficult to protect from weather and take up a small amount of cockpit space (highly dependent on design).

Mark


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> Hmmmm, that would have left me boat less, I must have been drinking heavily that day!


I don't know about the drinking, but you did say you were going back to land, mentioned your back or knees or something like that, but did say that you never say never.

Then I saw you in your new boat later that year! It is a nice boat and from a designer I didn't realize did catamarans.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj, smj, or any other multihull sailors...are there any good Facebook groups you'd recommend for good discussions about cruising multis? It would be great to get more first-hand knowledge and experience input - there, and hopefully at some point, here too.


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> Chris White has been using fixed keels in conjunction with daggerboards for years.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A great picture of the Atlantic 57 Anna during spring cleaning!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And Resolute, an Atlantic 48.
> He also has a 54' design with keels that was built in 1994.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


SMJ - do you know which boat that is on the bricks...or what the story is?


----------



## colemj

I don't do facebook, so don't know about any groups there. Isn't there a SA multihull group? I also don't do SA. There is an old list server group that has a lot of designers and even professional sailors contributing, but it is a total mess: The Multihulls Archives

Then there is the morass at cruisers forum that make some here look like angels. And the MH4us site that is almost moribund.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Arcb said:


> Interesting that some of the owners of cruising cats consider themselves to be the only real multi hull owners on this thread. Quite the club mentality. I didn't know this thread was specific to cruising cats only.


Everyone knows that beachcats rule. We're the only club that counts (though I think you misread Mark's post).

Now, do you know where I can get an electric windlass for my Spirit 17?


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> I don't know about the drinking, but you did say you were going back to land, mentioned your back or knees or something like that, but did say that you never say never.
> 
> Then I saw you in your new boat later that year! It is a nice boat and from a designer I didn't realize did catamarans.
> 
> Mark


Yes missing discs in the back and now my neck, so the sailing days may be numbered.
I think I have it figured out, you were the one drinking to much!! We didn't see you for a year and a half after we saw you in Stuart. Time flys when your having fun.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> I don't do facebook, so don't know about any groups there. Isn't there a SA multihull group? I also don't do SA. There is an old list server group that has a lot of designers and even professional sailors contributing, but it is a total mess: The Multihulls Archives
> 
> Then there is the morass at cruisers forum that make some here look like angels. And the MH4us site that is almost moribund.
> 
> Mark


Cruisers Forum is getting interesting, now the multihullers are fighting the other multihullers. Never a boring moment.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> SMJ - do you know which boat that is on the bricks...or what the story is?


I'm guessing your talking about the capsized Atlantic cat? Boats name is Anna and they appeared to have to much sail up for a squall. Makes for a great picture though!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> I don't do facebook, so don't know about any groups there. Isn't there a SA multihull group? I also don't do SA. There is an old list server group that has a lot of designers and even professional sailors contributing, but it is a total mess: The Multihulls Archives
> 
> Then there is the morass at cruisers forum that make some here look like angels. And the MH4us site that is almost moribund.
> 
> Mark


Yeah, I'm on SA a bit. Have been for years - mostly Cruising Anarchy - but have joined in on some of the Ocean Racing and general Sailing Anarchy at times as well. And there are some very knowledgeable guys on the multi forums over there (and also some real dolts). The problem is that it's not a site I want to have up with my kids around. Just too much crap going on. That's why I'm hoping we can get some traction here. Judging by the views and number or readers at the bottom of the page - we've got a very good start going on.

We'll see.

As for FB - I don't do it personally. I just have my Smackdaddy account...with over 2K followers who hang on my every word.


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> colemj, smj, or any other multihull sailors...are there any good Facebook groups you'd recommend for good discussions about cruising multis? It would be great to get more first-hand knowledge and experience input - there, and hopefully at some point, here too.


I'm a member of 
catamaran sailors group
The Multihull appreciation society and
Catamarans LeRouge, a group Mark may be interested in.
All Facebook.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> I'm guessing your talking about the capsized Atlantic cat? Boats name is Anna and they appeared to have to much sail up for a squall. Makes for a great picture though!
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Okay. So that's _ANNA_. Thanks smj.


----------



## smackdaddy

Though this dude is seriously annoying (as you can tell by the woman's reactions to him a lot of the time) - here is a great video of a passage from NZ to Fiji this past year on a Voyage Norseman 430...another brand I'd not heard about before.






Here's one on YW - pretty pricey:

1999 Voyage Yachts Norseman 430 Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com

Again, this pricing (e.g. - this boat at $410K, the Antares at $800K, etc.) - shows how the pricing on multis is really coming down. Demand is driving production where we're obviously seeing a lot of economy of scale. That's great news for us looking to buy later model used cats - and pure hell for these people trying to sell these older high-end models.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> Now, do you know where I can get an electric windlass for my Spirit 17?


I'm still wondering why it has so much prop walk?

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

I have another VERY good reason I'm interested in cats now - I HATE having the engine inside the boat. For cruising our area (Gulf of Mexico and upper Carib) heat is a very real issue. Having the engine throwing off heat after motoring most of the day in the ICW is excruciating when anchoring in places like the northern Gulf states in the summer - where you're balancing trying to stay cool with keeping the bugs out of the boat. I talk about that issue at about 5:00 in this video from our trip...

(EDIT: I pulled the video because it has some content that might re-ignite some angst here. Not worth it.)

The boys also talk about how miserable it can be in episodes following this one.

Having the engines tucked away in the hulls sounds glorious to me!


----------



## colemj

Many catamarans do have their engines in the hull. Ours does and we haven't had any issue with heat. They are boxed in under the berths, with thick insulation and a thick mattress on top. If we think they might be warm, or I need to work in the compartments shortly after motoring, we just turn on the blowers for a half hour and they suck outside air in while blowing hot air out.

There are pros and cons to engine placement. A couple of pro's to inside: 
1. If I need to work on, or check, the engines underway in bad weather or at night, I'm inside the well-lit boat with my tools and other stuff within a few steps away, and not on the back step with rain pouring into the compartment and poor light and the tools I didn't know I needed somewhere inside the boat.
2. If it is hot as hades and I need to work on the engines, I just turn on the air conditioning and let that icy air come out of the duct right above me.

The major con is it takes up valuable storage space under those berths. Some say smells are a con, but my opinion is that if your engine smells, you aren't taking care of it or cleaning up after yourself. Either way, it is something one needs to fix regardless of where the engine is located.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

I can see what you mean about having to work on them in bad weather - which is usually when you have the problem. And we had AC and a genny so we could fire-up that up as well. So maybe it's a grass is greener thing. Still, I look forward to giving it a go.

Doesn't the Outremer offer access via both inside and out?


----------



## smackdaddy

This is a pretty good video of docking and close-quarters handling we were talking about earlier...


----------



## DotDun

smackdaddy said:


> I have another VERY good reason I'm interested in cats now - I HATE having the engine inside the boat. For cruising our area (Gulf of Mexico and upper Carib) heat is a very real issue. Having the engine throwing off heat after motoring most of the day in the ICW is excruciating when anchoring in places like the northern Gulf states in the summer - where you're balancing trying to stay cool with keeping the bugs out of the boat. I talk about that issue at about 5:00 in this video from our trip...
> 
> (EDIT: I pulled the video because it has some content that might re-ignite some angst here. Not worth it.)
> 
> The boys also talk about how miserable it can be in episodes following this one.
> 
> Having the engines tucked away in the hulls sounds glorious to me!


I do like my separate engine rooms. Solid bulkhead between engine room and living space, no smells, no lifting mattress to check fluid levels. One time I had to replace a raw water impeller underway, left the hatch open for 1 hour to let the heat out, no problem in 3-4' seas, the engine room is a pretty stable place comparatively.

Less noise, smells, and heat in the living space.

FWIW, I experienced an Antares motoring, 95 decibels of noise at the bottom of the steps inside, extremely loud imo. Must be hard to sound proof the cabin sole.


----------



## smackdaddy

Thanks for the feedback dot. What do you sail?


----------



## DotDun

smackdaddy said:


> Thanks for the feedback dot. What do you sail?


FP Belize 43'

(also own a Hunter 410, it's a 'leaner' and I don't like it ;^)


----------



## smackdaddy

Those are very nice boats!










Congrats! I look forward to your input on this subject.


----------



## smackdaddy

DotDun said:


> FP Belize 43'
> 
> (also own a Hunter 410, it's a 'leaner' and I don't like it ;^)


Heh-heh. Oh boy, you've done it now...connected both ends of Sailing Forum Hell!


----------



## smj

We had under bunk diesels on our Sunstar and outside access on our Edel. I preferred the under bunk but then again the outside access on the Edel sucked. The access on the Edel was so small you had to sit on the diesels to work on them, sometimes painful. The under bunk access was huge and given your were in a stateroom probably less heat than most exterior engine access’s. I do remember I was impressed by the Privilege 39’s exterior access. You entered from the cockpit and it was very spacious and easy to work the diesel.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

Dot - is this your engine room config (from a sister YW boat)?










Does look roomy...and quiet!


----------



## DotDun

​


smackdaddy said:


> Heh-heh. Oh boy, you've done it now...connected both ends of Sailing Forum Hell!


You take the shots when you can! :grin


----------



## DotDun

smackdaddy said:


> Dot - is this your engine room config (from a sister YW boat)?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Does look roomy...and quiet!


Yep, that's the starboard engine room. The port side is actually smaller as there is space for the generator above the engine room.


----------



## smackdaddy

On the points of popularity and market shifts that we've discussed - here are two Young Punk couples who have moved into cats...

These Young Punks bought a Lagoon 420 catamaran in Spain out of charter I believe. They have some beachcat experience from what I see on their blog - but not much broader sailing experience. Here's their summary...



> LET ME TAKE A FEW STEPS BACK ....
> Rohan had this passionate idea that he would become a 'Sailor' and live a life where he could surf untouched waves around the world, hit some big storms in the middle of the ocean and challenge himself in situations that he could overcome his inner fear.
> 
> How we concluded that we will buy a yacht and sail around the world?
> 
> We lived in a wee surf town called Waikuku Beach in the South Island of New Zealand. We brought our first home in 2014, we worked hard and renovated our house into a beach bach paradise.
> 
> We loved our wee beach house but there was always something missing! We were not challenged. Rohan said to me "I want to create a life where I can look back in 50 years' time and share my stories with my children and grandchildren with enthusiasm and courage knowing that I followed my vision".
> 
> So, we decided to sell our beautiful beach house (this was very hard for me but I knew that it was the right move). Some of our family and friends thought we were absolutely 'CRAZY' to go out in the big ocean and sail a yacht with no experience. It took them a wee while to come around to the idea but once they were onboard they were all super excited for us!
> 
> With so many differing opinions about our choice good and bad, we decided to follow our dream and vision to give living life on the water a go and to step out of our comfort zone. We did not want to wake up with any regrets!
> 
> So we bought a yacht ............







Then you have these Young Punks who had cruised a trawler for a while, got sick of the costs and wanted to be more green and bought this 41' 1988 Crowther Spindrift Catamaran






So, yes, more and more young people are getting into sailing - and more and more are going multi.


----------



## rgp

UPDATE: Brad Baker's take from the Caribbean 600 capsize aboard 'Fujin' - Swiftsure Yachts


----------



## guitarguy56

Smack... You may want to check out Sail Pending, another family that are newbies on a catamaran and they have some great videos on their journeys... https://sale2sail.me/home/

Followed this family early in their sailing of their catamaran and my reason to have gotten the bug.


----------



## smackdaddy

guitarguy56 said:


> Smack... You may want to check out Sail Pending, another family that are newbies on a catamaran and they have some great videos on their journeys... https://sale2sail.me/home/
> 
> Followed this family early in their sailing of their catamaran and my reason to have gotten the bug.


Awesome. I'll check it out. Thanks guitar.


----------



## smackdaddy

rgp said:


> UPDATE: Brad Baker's take from the Caribbean 600 capsize aboard 'Fujin' - Swiftsure Yachts


Thanks rgp - that's a good article. As I'm sure many cat sailors around here suspected here is the cause from the writer's perspective...



> As we came out from the lee of the Island Wind speeds increased to 27-28 knots and puffs in the 32-34. No one knows the wind speed for sure at the time of the capsize, because it happened so quickly, but we were hit by a strong lifting puff likely in the 35-40 knot range (Later we heard from the catamaran Flow that they saw puffs to 40 knots in the same vicinity). *We did not react quickly enough to ease the mainsheet, traveler and jib and the boat went over.* It happened quickly and the capsize paused when the mast hit the water. Within seconds the leeward shrouds broke and the boat quickly turned turtle.


It happens on big cats when pushed too hard (FUJIN, ANNA, the G4 above, etc.) - just like it happens on a beachcat when pushed too hard (I've certainly done it).

The problem and solution both seem to be pretty clear.


----------



## SanderO

DotDun said:


> Yep, that's the starboard engine room. The port side is actually smaller as there is space for the generator above the engine room.


Is all service done from above leaning down???


----------



## smackdaddy

SanderO said:


> Is all service done from above leaning down???


From that pic, there seems to be PLENTY of room to get down into that space (not just lean down into it) for full access to the engine. It looks very similar to the engine space on the Amel on SV Delos.


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> From that pic, there seems to be PLENTY of room to get down into that space (not just lean down into it) for full access to the engine. It looks very similar to the engine space on the Amel on SV Delos.


I'm guessing quite a bit smaller than the Amel, but theirs is huge!
Here's an interesting link discussing engine access plus other things that make for a seaworthy cat.
http://seawindcats.com/community/multihull-mythologies-part-3/

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

Related to this, here is the access to the engine on the new Outremer 45...










I'm not positive but I think those engines are Volvo. The reason he is down there is that the "controller" (I assume the ignition relay?) keeps failing. He's been through several now and says he considers it routine mtx. That certainly seems to be a failing to me. But it's not on Outremer - it's on Volvo (if they are indeed the engine provider).

Anyway, I can't remember for sure if there is also a lift hatch at the stern stairs - but I think I would prefer a drop-down compartment than this access.


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> I'm guessing quite a bit smaller than the Amel, but theirs is huge!
> Here's an interesting link discussing engine access plus other things that make for a seaworthy cat.
> Multihull Mythologies (Part 3) | Seawind Catamarans Blog
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I'll have to look through that one in more detail, but I do like the new term "Furphy" - and it's interesting to see that this kind of age-old debate also happens in the multi world...



> #3: It has to be 40ft to do blue water
> 
> One of the greatest furphies (for our international readers a Furphy is a unsubstantiated comment) I have heard over the years is "If you are going blue water you need 40ft". I am at a loss to know where this idea originated. I have heard it in monohull as well as multihull circles.
> 
> ...
> 
> I suppose what I am trying to demonstrate here is the silly arbitrariness of these sorts of truisms.


He's got my attention thus far.

As to this conversation - here is his take on engine placement, access, etc.



> • ENGINES and their placement: This could be and probably will be the subject of an entire discussion on various engine related mythologies. But for the moment what is critically important is that the engines are placed as far forward as possible, for weight distribution issues and that access does not involve opening hatches that can allow following seas to enter the engine compartment, because once that happens its all over. The reality is that no cat will have enough fuel to do really long blue water passages so we should be using boats that sail well, but when we do use the motors we need to know that if there is an issue we can access the motors in a manner that is safe to the boat and the sailor. More than one instance has occurred of boats being rendered unpowerable as a result of having to open hatches at sea that are near the ocean. It appears that many people are prepared to trade off seaworthiness for the perceived convenience of external access to engines, not saying that all external access is bad, just those which have hatches too close to following seas.


----------



## overbored

why would a diesel need an ignition relay? many of the new diesels are fly by wire for the controls. Just a bad idea for a boat. IMHO


----------



## smackdaddy

overbored said:


> why would a diesel need an ignition relay? many of the new diesels are fly by wire for the controls. Just a bad idea for a boat. IMHO


Bear in mind, I'm guessing here. So don't take my word for it. I've just seen that he's replaced these things several times - and the test to see if it's working is to turn the key the first detente and see if there is power.

The Outremer brochure/specs don't list the make of the engine. So I don't know.


----------



## smackdaddy

smj - that is a good series of articles. I like what he says here in Part 1...



> PERFORMANCE IS IMPORTANT - NOT IN OUTRIGHT SPEED TERMS, BUT CERTAINLY IN CRUISING SAILING
> 
> What my sailing experiences tell me and what the Bureau of Meteorology confirms is that the average wind speeds along the east coast of Australia are below 15kts and mostly below 12kts. Of course as cruisers we don't leave safe harbour if it's blowing stupid wind speeds, so by a combination of choice and nature the large majority of our sailing is done in light winds. What that means then is that if you own a boat that won't effectively sail in 12kts of wind or less then you own a motor sailer. What that means is that performance is important to cruisers, perhaps more so that racers, performance to a cruiser means actually sailing whilst cruising and not motoring with the all the costs and frequent trips to marinas that is inherent in motorboat travel. Performance under sail is a cruisers life life performance under sail is a racer's afternoon fun. If you need 20kts to get going then you aren't going to sail too much, at least in this part of the world.


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> smj - that is a good series of articles. I like what he says here in Part 1...


The author is a very experienced Multihull sailor, not only with his boats but also racing on others and doing boat tests for the Australian Multihull Magazine. That magazine gets my 's up as the best.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> The author is a very experienced Multihull sailor, not only with his boats but also racing on others and doing boat tests for the Australian Multihull Magazine. That magazine gets my 's up as the best.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


As an ex-architect, I really like his walking through the DESIGN rationale behind these decisions - like with the location of the galley in relation to the helm and the considerations therein...

Multihull Mythologies (Part 2) | Seawind Catamarans Blog

He describes the interface between these kinds of decisions and the marketing that drives them and/or justifies them. This is the real job of a designer...to think these details through and make decisions based on his/her interpretations of that program. Marketers then try to position these decisions as unique and advantageous - then the market decides.

The issue is - the market typically doesn't understand those details and the problems solutions surrounding them, so things can get muddled very quickly and you see strange things popping up in boats that the market may want (which makes it easy for the marketing side) - but is a bad decision (which makes it hard for the design side).

Anyway, great resource to see the thinking behind some of these directions. Thanks!


----------



## colemj

That is a Volvo engine. The module that is failing is an electronic control for the engine that manages start, stop, and instrumentation like tach and gauges. Some have had a lot of problems with these, while others none at all.

That Outremer access looks not well-thought. Here is how we access our under berth engines - no need to disturb the mattress or remove boards:

Mark


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> As an ex-architect, I really like his walking through the DESIGN rationale behind these decisions - like with the location of the galley in relation to the helm and the considerations therein...
> 
> Multihull Mythologies (Part 2) | Seawind Catamarans Blog
> 
> He describes the interface between these kinds of decisions and the marketing that drives them and/or justifies them. This is the real job of a designer...to think these details through and make decisions based on his/her interpretations of that program. Marketers then try to position these decisions as unique and advantageous - then the market decides.
> 
> The issue is - the market typically doesn't understand those details and the problems solutions surrounding them, so things can get muddled very quickly and you see strange things popping up in boats that the market may want (which makes it easy for the marketing side) - but is a bad decision (which makes it hard for the design side).
> 
> Anyway, great resource to see the thinking behind some of these directions. Thanks!


No problem, I've always thought that was a good read.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## DotDun

SanderO said:


> Is all service done from above leaning down???


That picture is somewhat deceiving, it's taken from deck level. There is a '1st level' that has the engine room doors that are open in the pic, then you climb down into the engine room. Like I said, the starboard side is the 'spacious' engine room, the port side is smaller as the generator sits on the 1st level, hence the engine room doors are narrower. On the port side, you can only stand on one side of the engine and have to bend over to work on the port side of the port engine (oil filter, etc.).

Everything is a compromise.

FP, with the Belize model, was one of the early adopters of the 'engines outside the living space', and hence the engine/saildrive is mounted too close to the rudder, IMO. Reason I say this is there is not enough room between the saildrive leg and rudder for a folding prop. Yeah, feathering would work but not folding. I've often thought they should have flipped the engine around with saildrive in front and just rotate the lower leg 180°. But this would have caused them to add the saildrive leg extension which probably would add $50 to the cost :frown I've thought of doing it myself, but that project hasn't made it high enough on the priority list, yet! Maybe if I ever have to repower....

So all the batteries, engines, generator, fuel tank is aft of the aft bulkhead (which has only one hole in each engine room (with a plug in it) way above the waterline to stick a fire extinguisher thru), no chance for smells/heat to creep into the living space.


----------



## smj

DotDun said:


> That picture is somewhat deceiving, it's taken from deck level. There is a '1st level' that has the engine room doors that are open in the pic, then you climb down into the engine room. Like I said, the starboard side is the 'spacious' engine room, the port side is smaller as the generator sits on the 1st level, hence the engine room doors are narrower. On the port side, you can only stand on one side of the engine and have to bend over to work on the port side of the port engine (oil filter, etc.).
> 
> Everything is a compromise.
> 
> FP, with the Belize model, was one of the early adopters of the 'engines outside the living space', and hence the engine/saildrive is mounted too close to the rudder, IMO. Reason I say this is there is not enough room between the saildrive leg and rudder for a folding prop. Yeah, feathering would work but not folding. I've often thought they should have flipped the engine around with saildrive in front and just rotate the lower leg 180°. But this would have caused them to add the saildrive leg extension which probably would add $50 to the cost :frown I've thought of doing it myself, but that project hasn't made it high enough on the priority list, yet! Maybe if I ever have to repower....
> 
> So all the batteries, engines, generator, fuel tank is aft of the aft bulkhead (which has only one hole in each engine room (with a plug in it) way above the waterline to stick a fire extinguisher thru), no chance for smells/heat to creep into the living space.


The only negative is that's a lot of weight far aft. I'm sure FP took that into account when designing as they have a reputation for good performance.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

rgp said:


> UPDATE: Brad Baker's take from the Caribbean 600 capsize aboard 'Fujin' - Swiftsure Yachts


Jeez -after reading the full article...why anyone would use this as an example of a "cruising catamaran capsizing" is beyond me. Look at this...



> Conditions strengthened to a 25 knot average and we did see winds as high as 39.5 knots in a squall on that first 35 mile reach to the turning mark. *Top boats speed was 31+ knots. *We turned the corner and were on a 49 mile run to the next island. Wind speed hung in the mid to upper 20s with gusts into the lower 30s. Things remained sporty!


They were pushing this thing as hard as the G4 crew as pushing that boat. And they both went over for the same reason.

++++++++

I do have a question from a structural engineering standpoint. I posted that video of the dismasting earlier. It's one of the best examples I've ever seen of watching the build-up to the actual dismasting.

To help minimize risk of capsize - could you essentially design a failure point with the rig in relation to the boat's weight and capzizing moment? I'm just wondering what math is beind the strength level of the rig.

What happened in the video was definitely the best-case scenario. Could you find a middle ground without descending into dismastings everywhere?


----------



## smackdaddy

Here is the full text of Brad's account of the capsize. There are some good details in there such as inflating pfds being an issue, etc. Good read...



> 2/22/18: Here's the final report from Brad after arriving safely back home in Seattle&#8230;
> 
> I'm sure many if not most the readers already know, but Fujin did not finish the RORC Caribbean 600. At about the 150 mile mark we capsized. Here is a brief description of my perception of the race and events during and after the capsize.
> 
> The morning of the race we did final arrangements and prep. The forecast was for stronger winds 25-30 with gusts to 40 and bigger seas. Prep included a trip to the marine store, a safety meeting (turned out this was key) and lots of various little projects before pushing off. The race required that we motor by a safety inspection boat with all crew present on deck and wearing their personal safety gear (lifejacket, harness, tether, etc.)
> 
> The conditions at the start were 20 knots average wind speed into the upper 20s with higher gusts. The sea state was pretty aggressive with the bigger waves easily reaching 4 meters. We started on port tack near the port end of the line. We had a clean start and the race was on. After a short beat around the east end of Antigua, we bore off onto a beam reach. Conditions strengthened to a 25 knot average and we did see winds as high as 39.5 knots in a squall on that first 35 mile reach to the turning mark. Top boats speed was 31+ knots. We turned the corner and were on a 49 mile run to the next island. Wind speed hung in the mid to upper 20s with gusts into the lower 30s. Things remained sporty!
> 
> With the big sea state the drivers had to concentrate on keeping the bow from stuffing the waves in front of us. We rounded the southwest corner of Nevis Island and were again on a beam reach. The next turn was to be around the island of Saba. On the reach to Saba in the lee of Nevis and then St. Kitts islands, we had some fast, flatter water reaching as nighttime set in. Wind speeds averaged in the low 30s with more above 30 knots then below.
> 
> At roughly 5 square miles, Saba is small but its 3000-foot tall volcano that drops straight into the ocean makes it quite noticeable. Winds were changeable in the lee of the island - dropping into the teens at times during lulls and then nearly doubling and lifting 15-20 degrees in the puffs. In anticipation of the beat and the stronger winds we had reduced sail to the heavy weather staysail jib with one reef in the main. There is a small reef/shoal at this turn and we needed to make a decision to either sail inside it or to go low outside. In the lulls we weren't making it and we elected to go lower.
> 
> I was acting as navigator. Mike Leslie was at the computer in the cabin, and I was relaying navigation information. So I was in the cabin when it happened. As we came out from the lee of the Island Wind speeds increased to 27-28 knots and puffs in the 32-34. No one knows the wind speed for sure at the time of the capsize, because it happened so quickly, but we were hit by a strong lifting puff likely in the 35-40 knot range (Later we heard from the catamaran Flow that they saw puffs to 40 knots in the same vicinity). We did not react quickly enough to ease the mainsheet, traveler and jib and the boat went over. It happened quickly and the capsize paused when the mast hit the water. Within seconds the leeward shrouds broke and the boat quickly turned turtle.
> 
> It's a bit fuzzy but I remember my first thought as I realized we were going all the way over was being unhappy about not being able to finish the race. That thought quickly changed to survival mode as the cabin rapidly filled with water. Mike, who'd had a pretty good tumble as we flipped, had the quick mind to turn on the outside lights. This was huge and enabled all of us to quickly get our bearings with the main salon and the cockpit illuminated.
> 
> We did have air to work with in the top one or two feet of the cabin, but this reduced in height fast. We migrated aft to the cockpit and did a head count. There was a brief worry when not all hands were immediately found, but soon we had eyes on everyone (except Fritz Lanzinger who was already outside and on top or should I say the bottom of the boat). Fritz was able to yell to us and let us know he was safe. From there we made our way out the back and were helped up by Fritz to the bottom of the boat. Everyone was in pretty good shape.
> 
> One lesson learned was that automatic inflating PFD's may not be the best choice during a capsize. Everyone got out fine, but there were some worrisome moments with the PFD inflated and the need to swim under and out. I had changed to a manual PFD so did not inflate my own until I was safely on the bottom (outside) of the overturned catamaran.
> 
> Of course, we didn't want Fujin to capsize, but I have to say that I cannot think of a better group of sailors to find myself in this predicament with. Calm, cool heads prevailed and everyone made it out safely.
> 
> With all of us safely out, our attention turned to being rescued. Some of the crew fired off our personal AIS EPIRBs. I was later to find out that those signals were almost immediately picked up. First by a sailboat named Varuna that circled twice, verified the number on board and that we were all safe and I assume communicated this back to the race committee and Coast Guard. We later found out that another cat, Flow, stood by as well.
> 
> The first rescue vessel to arrive was a dive boat from Saba, then a fishing boat. We eventually inflated the life raft and transferred four at a time from Fujin to the fishing boat. Once all were aboard the fishing boat, a tow line was connected to Fujin and we headed for the safety of a small harbor on Saba. The tow took all night. It was only a little over 2 miles, but with current and wind it was a slow slog to the Island. We eventually made it and I am happy to say that Fujin is on a mooring and planning is well underway for her recovery.
> 
> Fujin will sail again!
> 
> Finally, I want to say how wonderful the people of Saba were. Quite frankly, they renewed my faith in people, as they were all super friendly and went out of their way to help us out. Even the folks who didn't know we had just been rescued were very friendly and kind. Everyone who passed by always offered a wave and a smile. Even though Nick, the skipper of the Fishing boat, had been up all night with the rescue. He and his wife continued to help throughout the day, arranging for a dive boat to go retrieve personal gear, gave use of their personal phone to call loved ones and eventually gave us a ride to the airport for a flight back to Antigua. I can't say enough about their generosity and support. This is a beautiful island with wonderful people and I plan to go back.
> 
> I know there will be a lot of talk on the Internet about the safety of a boat like this and the fact that we probably pushed too hard, which is undeniable since we did capsize. There are inherent risks to sailing a high-performance cat. But with all that said, armed with what we learned, I would not hesitate to step onboard with the crew we had and do this race again aboard Fujin.


----------



## smackdaddy

Here's some bashing upwind in 30+ knots and pretty lumpy seas on a run from Fiji to NZ on a FP Helia 44...






Another takeaway here is that, as they say, these are the worst conditions they've been in since leaving France. That's a long way around the world in pretty good conditions. So may Hal Roth was right.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> To help minimize risk of capsize - could you essentially design a failure point with the rig in relation to the boat's weight and capzizing moment? I'm just wondering what math is beind the strength level of the rig.


No. Some people like to think that cruising catamarans, or at least the production boats, are designed so that their rigs will fail before they capsize. I don't know how this got started, but suspect marketing/salesman trying to sooth initiate fears.

It just isn't possible to engineer a "fuse" so precisely. I would be pretty unhappy if we had a non-dangerous hard jibe stuffing into a wave that put a momentary shock load on the rig large enough to cause a dismasting because someone designed a weak point into the rig.

Then there is the question of where to put that weak point. How do you want the rig to topple? Would it be the same in every case and every condition? Upwind and downwind? With rotation or without? Capsize and pitchpole?

What happens if someone is killed from an intentional design failure? What happens if the boat capsizes and the rig doesn't fail? What happens if the rig failing leads to a capsize?

It probably can be calculated for a defined static condition, but not for dynamic conditions.

So if anyone ever hears that a cruising catamarans rig is designed to fail before the boat capsizes, you can be sure the person saying it is talking out their bottom. Or is a salesman.

Mark


----------



## RegisteredUser

smackdaddy said:


> ....
> To help minimize risk of capsize - could you essentially design a failure point with the rig in relation to the boat's weight and capzizing moment? I'm just wondering what math is beind the strength level of the rig.......


Jeez, dude.
You want an 'automatic' boat?


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> No. Some people like to think that cruising catamarans, or at least the production boats, are designed so that their rigs will fail before they capsize. I don't know how this got started, but suspect marketing/salesman trying to sooth initiate fears.
> 
> It just isn't possible to engineer a "fuse" so precisely. I would be pretty unhappy if we had a non-dangerous hard jibe stuffing into a wave that put a momentary shock load on the rig large enough to cause a dismasting because someone designed a weak point into the rig.
> 
> Then there is the question of where to put that weak point. How do you want the rig to topple? Would it be the same in every case and every condition? Upwind and downwind? With rotation or without? Capsize and pitchpole?
> 
> What happens if someone is killed from an intentional design failure? What happens if the boat capsizes and the rig doesn't fail? What happens if the rig failing leads to a capsize?
> 
> It probably can be calculated for a defined static condition, but not for dynamic conditions.
> 
> So if anyone ever hears that a cruising catamarans rig is designed to fail before the boat capsizes, you can be sure the person saying it is talking out their bottom. Or is a salesman.
> 
> Mark


Yeah - I understand it's tricky. But it's an interesting thought exercise. I can't remember exactly, but didn't the G4 people institute something like a fuse in their mainsheet system? That might be another option - I don't know.

I agree with you that it would absolutely suck to have failures in non-emergency situations - but I look at the load being put on that boat in that dismasting video and it's just incredible.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> Here's some bashing upwind in 30+ knots and pretty lumpy seas on a run from Fiji to NZ on a FP Helia 44...


Isn't that kind of unlucky? I thought the Fiji to NZ was an off-wind trip, but the return from NZ to Fiji was the basher?

Mark


----------



## DotDun

smj said:


> The only negative is that's a lot of weight far aft. I'm sure FP took that into account when designing as they have a reputation for good performance.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Agree, a lot of weight aft (the hull is wider aft).....the fresh water tanks are at the base of the mast and forward, (2) 300L tanks. If the water tanks are empty, we'll lose 1kt in speed. Got to keep water in the tanks/weight balanced to get good speed. Kind of counter intuitive for a cat, add weight forward and gain speed.:wink


----------



## smj

DotDun said:


> Agree, a lot of weight aft (the hull is wider aft).....the fresh water tanks are at the base of the mast and forward, (2) 300L tanks. If the water tanks are empty, we'll lose 1kt in speed. Got to keep water in the tanks/weight balanced to get good speed. Kind of counter intuitive for a cat, add weight forward and gain speed.:wink


Strange you say that as I remember owners of Gemini's moving people to the foredeck to gain speed!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> I can't remember exactly, but didn't the G4 people institute something like a fuse in their mainsheet system? That might be another option - I don't know.


There have been several systems over the years designed to release the mainsheet. None of them have ever worked well, were complicated, and aren't a guarantee, but maybe they could/do prevent an accident some of the times - hard to prove a negative.

Some of these systems are still in commercial operation, and I believe some racing boats are using them.

Didn't the G4 have one of these systems when it capsized?

One problem with this idea is the very short time they could work. Powered up tight and experiencing a fast, hard lift that starts to rotate the boat only provides a split second where releasing the mainsheet can do any good. Particularly for light boats going fast.

Although I'm a big fan of tech and electronics doing better jobs than humans for a lot of things (autopilots, for example), when it comes to a decision to release a mainsheet, I think humans are quicker and more reliable than sensor/activator systems.

The real answer is to not drive a boat that hard without someone sitting next to the mainsheet. If you are cruising and still keeping up a good pace in building conditions, don't leave the helm for things like dinner, movies, etc. If you do want to do that, reef deeply and do a safe 6-8kts.

Frankly, I don't believe any of those race guys when they say "we just didn't release the mainsheet fast enough". I don't think doing so would even matter at the point they go over, unless someone was sitting there with the mainsheet in his hands actively playing the sail like on a beach cat. It is the nature of these high performance catamarans to have this innate risk - much more so when racing them.

It is much different on a cruising catamaran, or even a performance catamaran that is not strictly designed for racing (Outremer, for example). The risk here is so low as to be in the category of keels falling off of monohulls. Maybe less so, given recent developments in keels falling off.

However, we never have our mainsheet in a clutch - it is always on the winch at the helm ready to be release by simply knocking it out of the jaws. And we aren't a performance boat, and reef at the slightest cause.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

I'm pretty sure they added that after. I'll look it up. Here was the system prior to the capsize from what I can tell...












> MAINSAIL CONTROL SYSTEM: A light cat requires easy control of the mainsail. The helmsman trims the mainsheet with foot-pedal hydraulic pumps, and eases with the push of a button. The GUNBOAT G4 is the first high-performance cat to allow such short-handed control and safety&#8230;


The button didn't work.


----------



## colemj

BWAAAHAAAHAAA! I never noticed that. Definitely a "multi-purpose coastal cruiser" (as per their website).

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

That was the deal breaker for me. Took the G4 right off my list of cruising cats. I have enough trouble with those in my living room...


----------



## smackdaddy

You can see the helmsman (Mischa) in the cap with his feet on those sheeting pedals...










This is right before the crash. The "mainsheet" is fully hydraulic. They had a release valve on it that was too small and couldn't release fast enough. He says the new valve is 3X the size of the original. Lesson learned.

Here is the video of Mischa talking about what happened...


----------



## smackdaddy

Though it's about 4 years old now, I found an interesting CW article:



> *40 of the Best Catamarans and Trimarans. Ever.*
> _Move over, monohulls. Check out Cruising World's list of the 40 multihulls that most significantly changed the boat-design game._


Look what's on the list!










And you just HAVE to love this one...









Piver Lodestar 35

And number 1 of all time at that point...









Leopard 48


----------



## aeventyr60

colemj said:


> Isn't that kind of unlucky? I thought the Fiji to NZ was an off-wind trip, but the return from NZ to Fiji was the basher?
> 
> Mark


Actually the strategy is to make as much easting as possible leaving the islands..with the trade winds...fair winds until about 30 South..then it is a real crap shoot. Sub tropical weather here is the fastest changing weather anywhere. Always hated the return trip to New Zealand. Easy to see the 3- 4 days forecast...but after that not so easy. Leaving New Zealand back to the islands you know that just getting North to 30 South will leave the cold and crap wx behind. We hove to twice on trips back to NZ...

Some interesting reading on the Queens Birthday storm here:
https://www.amazon.com/Rescue-Pacific-Story-Disaster-Survival/dp/0070486190


----------



## seabeau

To me the real issue has to be the crews apparent failure to realize just what the change in the wind meant as they moved out of the lee of the island. Velocity and direction are important. This event is not just an example of poor boat handling but poor fundamental seamanship.


----------



## smackdaddy

seabeau said:


> To me the real issue has to be the crews apparent failure to realize just what the change in the wind meant as they moved out of the lee of the island. Velocity and direction are important. This event is not just an example of poor boat handling but poor fundamental seamanship.


I think you're being a bit too harsh in that last sentence. You have to remember that FUJIN was in full-on race mode, intentionally pushing the boat as hard as they could within their perceived limits. I think you could somewhat make a case for poor boat handling in their not being prepared - or being too slow - to blow the sheets as they came out of that wind shadow. But I think saying that it's an example of poor fundamental seamanship is going a bit far. This is racing. It's very different from "prudent" and conservative risk-reduction you typically associate with "good seamanship" on the cruising end of things.

As you saw in the photo I posted above, they push this boat very hard in races - to the point that at times get a hull flying. And they build their "seamanship" around that approach. And this is why you have things like the ISAF regs in racing where it is understood that you're not being conservative with the boat - so you have to be FAR more conservative with all the means of safety around you (gear, training, etc.). In that regard, this is far better fundamental seamanship than virtually any cruiser out there will have. Again - it's just a very different animal...and why these examples of capsize have literally nothing to do with cruising cats.


----------



## outbound

There’s some really new and inventive thinking in offerings coming up.
Friend in Barrington has just started a new company. Target is mom and pop or small family interested in voyaging and cruising not charter. Price point 800k-1m.
Designer Schoilling
Builder Steve Brody 
Innovative features 
Diesel electric propulsion. Diesel only invocated in absence of sufficient alt. energy. Charges through hydroelectric from sail drives as well as walk on solar.
Central helm inside saloon with all lines lead to that position. Can be sailed solo!! Panels above helm are glass and can be retracted.
Cutting edge design. Narrow 3’ at water line wave cutting hulls. Magnificent queen berth staterooms(one each hul), head, shower in each hull with additional one viable single passage berth in each hull. Daggerboards don’t interfere with interior. Skedges protect running gear and add directional stability. Horizon portion improves ride/performance.
CF/foam panel construction. Interesting to see how structural elements are nested on panels to avoid waste.
Anyone interested in a for real ocean going cruiser in the 45’ range should hold off a bit. There’s amazing boats coming down the pike.


----------



## SanderO

outbound said:


> There's some really new and inventive thinking in offerings coming up.
> Friend in Barrington has just started a new company. Target is mom and pop or small family interested in voyaging and cruising not charter. Price point 800k-1m.
> Designer Schoilling
> Builder Steve Brody
> Innovative features
> Diesel electric propulsion. Diesel only invocated in absence of sufficient alt. energy. Charges through hydroelectric from sail drives as well as walk on solar.
> Central helm inside saloon with all lines lead to that position. Can be sailed solo!! Panels above helm are glass and can be retracted.
> Cutting edge design. Narrow 3' at water line wave cutting hulls. Magnificent queen berth staterooms(one each hul), head, shower in each hull with additional one viable single passage berth in each hull. Daggerboards don't interfere with interior. Skedges protect running gear and add directional stability. Horizon portion improves ride/performance.
> CF/foam panel construction. Interesting to see how structural elements are nested on panels to avoid waste.
> Anyone interested in a for real ocean going cruiser in the 45' range should hold off a bit. There's amazing boats coming down the pike.


This is out of the price range for most sailors.... maybe for middle aged people who liquidate their home and put it into a boat...


----------



## smackdaddy

SanderO said:


> This is out of the price range for most sailors.... maybe for middle aged people who liquidate their home and put it into a boat...


I'm interested in why you keep bringing issues like this up in this discussion. What does that have to do with the popularity and/or interest of multis?


----------



## mbianka

outbound said:


> There's some really new and inventive thinking in offerings coming up.
> Friend in Barrington has just started a new company. Target is mom and pop or small family interested in voyaging and cruising not charter. Price point 800k-1m.
> Designer Schoilling
> Builder Steve Brody
> Innovative features
> Diesel electric propulsion. Diesel only invocated in absence of sufficient alt. energy. Charges through hydroelectric from sail drives as well as walk on solar.
> Central helm inside saloon with all lines lead to that position. Can be sailed solo!! Panels above helm are glass and can be retracted.
> .


Having converted to electric propulsion ten years ago I expect this will cut down on maintenance and costs considerably with only one diesel to maintain. Also having solar, wind and regen capabilities it probably won't be used a lot compared to current one diesel per prop configurations. There also won't be a need for a separate diesel power generator too! More storage room too without those diesels in the hulls.


----------



## smj

outbound said:


> There's some really new and inventive thinking in offerings coming up.
> Friend in Barrington has just started a new company. Target is mom and pop or small family interested in voyaging and cruising not charter. Price point 800k-1m.
> Designer Schoilling
> Builder Steve Brody
> Innovative features
> Diesel electric propulsion. Diesel only invocated in absence of sufficient alt. energy. Charges through hydroelectric from sail drives as well as walk on solar.
> Central helm inside saloon with all lines lead to that position. Can be sailed solo!! Panels above helm are glass and can be retracted.
> Cutting edge design. Narrow 3' at water line wave cutting hulls. Magnificent queen berth staterooms(one each hul), head, shower in each hull with additional one viable single passage berth in each hull. Daggerboards don't interfere with interior. Skedges protect running gear and add directional stability. Horizon portion improves ride/performance.
> CF/foam panel construction. Interesting to see how structural elements are nested on panels to avoid waste.
> Anyone interested in a for real ocean going cruiser in the 45' range should hold off a bit. There's amazing boats coming down the pike.


Could the designer possibly be Schionning instead of Schiolling? Schionning is a well known Australian designer known for designing performance cats with hulls with skinny beams.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

Another great video on handling a cat...


----------



## TakeFive

smackdaddy said:


> I think you're being a bit too harsh in that last sentence... <litany of excuses>...


The dude turtled his frickin' boat. If that's not an example of poor seamanship, then what is?

Even skilled sailors make mistakes. The best ones own up to their mistakes and learn from them. I'd expect the captain himself would be quick to admit that he could have exhibited better seamanship.


----------



## smackdaddy

TakeFive said:


> The dude turtled his frickin' boat. If that's not an example of poor seamanship, then what is?
> 
> Even skilled sailors make mistakes. The best ones own up to their mistakes and learn from them. I'd expect the captain himself would be quick to admit that he could have exhibited better seamanship.


How many VOR and Vendee boats are broken each run? How about the Sydney-Hobart boats? How many AC cats go over? Yet these are some of the most talented, seasoned, experienced, trained, and capable seamen on the ocean. Period. And they take risks virtually NO cruiser would EVER take (for very good reason) - and they typically get criticized for it as you see here if there is a bad outcome. Yet most of the time, they do it very successfully because they are just that much better seamen.

So, mistakes in boathandling are one thing when it comes to breaking a boat - "poor seamanship" is quite another when we're talking sailing at that level. Seamanship involves far more than blowing a sheet in time or not *in a race*.

For example you have Vestas in the previous VOR hitting the reef at night. That was an incident of poor seamanship because it involved several fundamental failures - not just timing an unseen strong puff. Even so, I would never criticize these guys' *overall* seamanship. None of us on this or any other forum out there can hold a candle to these guys in this arena.

So, yes, there is absolutely a distinction despite the outcome.


----------



## TakeFive

“...despite the outcome.”

Just excuses and defensiveness. 

Jeopardizing safety of your crew by turtling your boat is the ultimate example of poor seamanship. Period. 

I never said that he has poor overall seamanship skills. That’s a red herring that you threw into the mix.


----------



## smj

TakeFive said:


> "...despite the outcome."
> 
> Just excuses and defensiveness.
> 
> Jeopardizing safety of your crew by turtling your boat is the ultimate example of poor seamanship. Period.
> 
> I never said that he has poor overall seamanship skills. That's a red herring that you threw into the mix.


To win races it appears you have to show poor seamanship, so if your in a race are you there to win or show seamanship?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

TakeFive said:


> "...despite the outcome."
> 
> Just excuses and defensiveness.
> 
> Jeopardizing safety of your crew by turtling your boat is the ultimate example of poor seamanship. Period.
> 
> I never said that he has poor overall seamanship skills. That's a red herring that you threw into the mix.


Okay TF - you're trying the same old baiting again, making it personal. I'm not interested. If you want to reasonably talk multis I'm happy to do that. Otherwise I think the evidence speaks very clearly for itself to typical readers out there. Later.


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> To win races it appears you have to show poor seamanship, so if your in a race are you there to win or show seamanship?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I think the problem is that he is trying to make the two mutually exclusive. And that couldn't be further from reality.

With most all the capsize examples that have been presented there are extreme extenuating circumstances be they racing, severe storms/hurricanes, etc. Only one case I've seen thus far has any direct relevance to this discussion about cruising mutlis - and that's ANNA. The story there makes it clear that they were over-canvassed for conditions (just like in that video of the mono above - as well as the dismasting video above), did not seem to be monitoring those conditions closely, obviously didn't have the skillset/knowledge of the level of sailors we're talking about above, and simply were overwhelmed. In my book that is "poor seamanship" in that several things were done wrong and/or missed as I said above. Even so, I won't spend time criticizing them. And I certainly won't blame the boat type.

That said, I'm still very interested in why CWD boats have such a record of capsize. There certainly seems to be something going on there. I just don't know what it is yet.


----------



## smackdaddy

Now - if you want to see a TRULY SPECTACULAR capsize of a multi - here you go (watch the boom the whole time)...






https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/o...aran-capsize-in-Route-des-Princes-Dublin.html


> "We were at the limit of weather conditions for our boats and it was not great for racing," said Yann Guichard. I was unable to do anything at the helm, the boat was turned over with a single blow. We let out the staysail immediately, but it was too late as it all happened in a split second.
> 
> "The boat was lifted onto the port float and went over. Jacques was with me in the cockpit and we found ourselves in the net ... we managed to get out and then were airlifted."
> 
> "All the MODs had one reef in the main and staysail. We started a bit below and behind the fleet and found ourselves slightly in a wind shadow. When our rivals had moved away we had a sudden gust literally flattened us.
> 
> ...
> 
> "It was windy and gusty but it is very unusual to see a trimaran go over in a fully crewed situation," said Damian Foxall, who was just yards away on board Oman Air Musandam when the accident happened.
> 
> "We are all very aware of the risks. Without being too blasé it is part and parcel of the sport. It is dangerous because we are on the edge for a lot of the time but it doesn't change the fact that it is absolutely fantastic racing and this is a fantastic event and this is why we are here. As a rule, these boats deliver speed in a reliable way and it is up to the crew to manage the boat and keep it on three hulls."


So yes, this multi turtled and there was an injury (skipper's brother). Yet Yann Guichard doesn't suck at seamanship. And I still have zero concern about buying a cruising multi because this has absolutely nothing to do with that.


----------



## seabeau

smackdaddy said:


> I think you're being a bit too harsh in that last sentence. You have to remember that FUJIN was in full-on race mode, intentionally pushing the boat as hard as they could within their perceived limits. I think you could somewhat make a case for poor boat handling in their not being prepared - or being too slow - to blow the sheets as they came out of that wind shadow. But I think saying that it's an example of poor fundamental seamanship is going a bit far. This is racing. It's very different from "prudent" and conservative risk-reduction you typically associate with "good seamanship" on the cruising end of things.
> 
> As you saw in the photo I posted above, they push this boat very hard in races - to the point that at times get a hull flying. And they build their "seamanship" around that approach. And this is why you have things like the ISAF regs in racing where it is understood that you're not being conservative with the boat - so you have to be FAR more conservative with all the means of safety around you (gear, training, etc.). In that regard, this is far better fundamental seamanship than virtually any cruiser out there will have. Again - it's just a very different animal...and why these examples of capsize have literally nothing to do with cruising cats.


If the sheets had been manned as the vessel came out of the island's "shadow", the vessel would not have been knocked down. This is fundamentally good seamanship and leadership.


----------



## smackdaddy

seabeau said:


> If the sheets had been manned as the vessel came out of the island's "shadow", the vessel would not have been knocked down. This is fundamentally good seamanship and leadership.


Again, I've looked at the reports of this and I haven't seen it said that the sheets were not manned. Remember there were 8 sailors aboard FUJIN. Maybe it was a malfunction in the release (like the undersized hydraulic valve in the case of the G4) or maybe a hockle or whatever? Who knows? I've certainly had that problem and gone over in our beachcat when flying a hull (a true balancing act that definitely puts you on "the edge") and my seamanship is far beyond reproach as most will tell you. Heh.

Seriously, from what info are you drawing your conclusions? The skipper says this in the report above...



> In anticipation of the beat and the stronger winds we had reduced sail to the heavy weather staysail jib with one reef in the main.


Would you consider that good seamanship? I would.

Then the reason she went over, just as we've seen with the other multi racing examples we've discussed above...



> We did not react quickly enough to ease the mainsheet, traveler and jib and the boat went over.


So, if a reader is interested in a cruising multihull I think the lesson is very clear and simple...conservatively manage your sails to conditions. There are thousands of these cruising mutlis out there doing this successfully every day. It's just not an issue.

On the other hand, if you're going to ballsout race and keep everything on "the edge" - *be prepared to turtle*. It will probably happen at some point. So, in this case, your seamanship is judged more by your preparation for that outcome as stated above with the tri capsize - than it is your split-second ability to blow a sheet.

I'm not interested in flying a hull of my eventual cruising cat.


----------



## paulinnanaimo

I'm asking this out of curiosity, don't pounce if it's a dumb question.
The catamarans that are being discussed are worth big dollars, they are loaded with fancy equipment. I would think that an adjustable auto-release mainsheet could be fitted. You set it for 2 tons pressure or whatever is realistic for the sail, wind, etc., and it would dump some air on it's own before capsize. Possible?


----------



## smackdaddy

paulinnanaimo said:


> I'm asking this out of curiosity, don't pounce if it's a dumb question.
> The catamarans that are being discussed are worth big dollars, they are loaded with fancy equipment. I would think that an adjustable auto-release mainsheet could be fitted. You set it for 2 tons pressure or whatever is realistic for the sail, wind, etc., and it would dump some air on it's own before capsize. Possible?


Hey pauli - I don't know who in this thread is going to "pounce" if you're just making comments, or asking questions, or presenting good info, etc. - but not taking personal shots or making wild claims. As you can see, it's been a pretty peaceful and fun thread. So I wouldn't worry about it. Have you seen how dumb my questions are?

Anyway, as to your question, that's exactly what I was asking Mark above. It's makes a lot of sense to me, at least theoretically - but I'm sure there are serious costs factors - and or the likelihood that you've a lot of "false positives" leading to some very frustrated owners as Mark mentioned. He's right I think.

Still, I would be interested if there are structural engineers and/or nautical architects around here (like BobP for example - maybe I'll give him a shout) that would have input.


----------



## paulinnanaimo

It was a dumb question since the issue was already discussed. I haven't read every entry because my interest is moderate, I know I can't own one of these in this lifetime.


----------



## TakeFive

paulinnanaimo said:


> I'm asking this out of curiosity, don't pounce if it's a dumb question.
> The catamarans that are being discussed are worth big dollars, they are loaded with fancy equipment. I would think that an adjustable auto-release mainsheet could be fitted. You set it for 2 tons pressure or whatever is realistic for the sail, wind, etc., and it would dump some air on it's own before capsize. Possible?


Not a dumb question. Total speculation from a non-expert, but I wonder if your suggestion would be prohibited on race boats, just like auto-pilot and other automation are also banned. Electronic instruments are fine, but electro-mechanicals, not so much. Maybe someone can elaborate.


----------



## chef2sail

smackdaddy said:


> Okay TF - you're trying the same old baiting again, making it personal. I'm not interested. If you want to reasonably talk multis I'm happy to do that. Otherwise I think the evidence speaks very clearly for itself to typical readers out there. Later.


I didn't find Take Fives post as personal at all. He was just stating his own observations as a sailboat owner.

If anything he represents a TYPICAL SN sailor.

I read threads such as this as with an open mind to learn about larger catamarans from people who really own them. My only experience catamaran sailing is 10 years hobie catting and two charters in the Carribean. 
It definitely occupies a specific niche and who wouldn't want all that living space , especially when chartering with another couple or many people. Plus you get the sailing experience. Though most SN are not long term cruisers, some are and it's an interesting alternative to a traditional monohull.

I am most interested in hearing from those who actually own them and have personal experience of the plusses and minuses. We can all read and Google the glitzy sales ads and specs. It is personal knowledge though which gives the unfiltered unbiased knowledge for me.

It seems anyone who posts a offering opinion is ridiculed, their comments called atypical, or accused of being part of a mythical posse we with ulterior motives. Even the mods get included in these assertions. Let it go.

We are all sailors here. Most own boats or want to. Negativity toward others with differing opinions doesn't foster a positive post or accomplish anything. Trying to direct the nature or direction if a thread and dissuade people from posting if they don't agree with your opinion or direction doesn't allow free discussion. SN is for all who want to read or post , not for the few who want to dominate either by verb as l intimidation or the sheer volume of their opinions in any given thread.

I have found many of the comments from the true multihull owners who have posted here. As well good opinions and questions from those who own mono hulls. Free discourse is preferred. I am against anyone/ group who tries to discourage that.

Carry on⛵??
Mahalo


----------



## smackdaddy

Chef, to be very clear I didn't imply or tell TF (or anyone else) at any time that he couldn't or shouldn't post. That's certainly not my role. I just said *I *wasn't going to continue that particular conversation. And I won't.

If it begins to simply become arguing about ones technique of arguing - or running down semantic or logic rabbit holes - or accusations that a person is "defensive" or "sensitive" or "making excuses" or throwing "red herrings" or whatever - then it clearly becomes personal, not topical. I'm just saying I'm done playing those games. I really am. And I don't speak for *anyone* else.

I just want to learn about cruising multihulls and, at the same time, share with others what I'm learning - while having the experienced multihull sailors here guiding and refining that conversation. I think that's *very* productive for *everyone *reading this thread.

Now, trying to stay out of this kind of stuff, I wouldn't have responded to your post except you made this very valuable point...



> I have found many of the comments from the true multihull owners who have posted here.


I have too. And I'm hoping more and more come in. Judging by the views, this thread is obviously a hit!


----------



## smackdaddy

Just found another Young Punk couple who have gone multi. They have a Seawind 1160. I love her infectious happiness and descriptions of her feelings ("probably better than my wedding day"). What a great woman!






At about 3:40 the dude raises the middle panel of the salon entry with the winch - turning it into a freakin' hard bimini (with the window acting as a sight aloft)! Freakin' brilliant!

At about 6:54 you can see him working on the engine (and busting up the screws) - and the access he has.

Good video. I've subscribed.


----------



## colemj

I know Damian, as well as several of these extreme multihull racers. A number of them also own cruising boats. I can guarantee that they have more seamanship and experience with sailing boats than anyone on this forum.

They are professional racers. It is their job to take their machines to the very edge and hold them there. It has nothing at all to do with seamanship, although the ability to perform this feat is about the height of good seamanship in pretty much every way. It is like saying Michael Shumacher is a poor driver because he sometimes loses control on the F1 circuit.

This is no different mono or catamaran or trimaran - the job of these guys is to take those boats to the extreme and keep them there. Yes, they may have a risk tolerance, or even a risk addiction or obsession, that may look like "poor seamanship" - particularly the crazy French - but that is confined to the race course and the extreme boats. 

And again, seamanship is the only thing that keeps those boats in races. I've sailed with some on passages on their cruising boats and those are reefed at night or in proper conditions, never over-driven, good watch keeping with proper navigation, a full understanding of the rules, and a desire to stay out of the way of other boats regardless of the rules. Their seamanship is outstanding.

I've also sailed on a Mod70. This is a special-purpose machine that is extreme in all ways. It is ready to go over when tied to a dock. The amount of seamanship it requires to just get it out of a harbor probably exceeds that of most here. Under way, that thing takes an entire professional crew working tightly together with high coordination just to keep it on its feet. Those boats easily do twice wind speed and reach 40-50kts, and the foils lift it in the smallest breeze. Bearing away through the death zone on that boat is a white-knuckle, butt-clenching experience. Even for them. There is no way I could ever control that boat - I don't have enough seamanship for it.

Mark


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> Just found another Young Punk couple who have gone multi. They have a Seawind 1160. I love her infectious happiness and descriptions of her feelings ("probably better than my wedding day"). What a great woman!
> 
> S01E06 - First Sail on Our New Catamaran: Meet Hootie, Gorgeous Sunset, and Engine Problems - YouTube
> 
> At about 3:40 the dude raises the middle panel of the salon entry with the winch - turning it into a freakin' hard bimini (with the window acting as a sight aloft)! Freakin' brilliant!
> 
> At about 6:54 you can see him working on the engine (and busting up the screws) - and the access he has.
> 
> Good video. I've subscribed.


I've enjoyed their videos as well but I'm pretty sure they have stopped cruising and sold the boat. Hopefully I'm wrong.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

TakeFive said:


> Not a dumb question. Total speculation from a non-expert, but I wonder if your suggestion would be prohibited on race boats, just like auto-pilot and other automation are also banned. Electronic instruments are fine, but electro-mechanicals, not so much. Maybe someone can elaborate.


These systems do exist, and they have been used on race boats, but they are just too complicated and imprecise. They may decrease the problem, but they don't eliminate it. There are many specific sets of conditions that aren't dangerous that would trip it, as well as many sets of dangerous conditions that wouldn't.

But the real issue for multihulls, particularly for race boats, is that the window of opportunity one has to exit a potential capsize just from releasing a mainsheet is extremely small. I'm sure the beachcat sailors can describe where they only have a split second to do anything themselves before the boat has a mind of its own and you are left just a dummy sitting in a dunk tank (or a rock loaded in a trebuchet).

Releasing the mainsheet isn't a catch-all solution for a multihull about to go over the edge. It might be one of several things that should be done, and it might also worsen a situation.

But there are commercial versions of these types of systems, and new ones periodically come up with a lot of hype and quickly and silently go away.

Also, a bit of perspective is needed for cruising boats. So much concern about this flipping over thing is unwarranted. Keels fall off cruising monohulls at the same rate as cruising catamarans flip, but nobody is dreaming about installing retractable pontoons that can shoot out before the boat goes over. I think it is more about being comfortable with the devil you know, as well as racing monos seldom lose their keels on TV or in-shore events, while racing multis are seen flipping.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> Also, a bit of perspective is needed for cruising boats. So much concern about this flipping over thing is unwarranted. Keels fall off cruising monohulls at the same rate as cruising catamarans flip, but nobody is dreaming about installing retractable pontoons that can shoot out before the boat goes over. I think it is more about being comfortable with the devil you know, as well as racing monos seldom lose their keels on TV or in-shore events, while racing multis are seen flipping.


It does seem there is an inordinate amount of fear of capsize. And I think you're exactly right about it being, at the heart of it, comfortable with the devil you know. Even sailing a beachcat the relatively small amount we have, you realize how to deal with the boat. In other words, you do have to actively push everything to get it on the edge (flying a hull, etc.)...the same with any boat. If you're not doing that, it's a pretty tame - yet fast - ride.

Maybe it's the fact that, as I said pages ago, most of us mono sailors know a great deal about how to "fully" control our own monos - but understand very little how to fully control a multi in the same way (the "death zone" issue for example). Mix into that equation the very real and huge speed differential between the boat types and multis just *seem* more "unstable/uncontrollable" to some sailors...which leads straight to fear. It's kind of like when we would take new people out on our monos and they were afraid the boat would "fall over" at which time we had to explain how the keel works. When you know, you're just not afraid anymore.

And, speaking of, I agree that from anecdotal evidence I've seen - the non-racing/non-severe-storm incidence of keel departure on monos seems to mirror the incidence of capsize on multis. It's exceedingly low in relation to the numbers of boats out there. Yet on a multi, its survivable. On a mono, it's usually not. So I think the fear is very, very misplaced...especially when you look at that more empirical data provided by that NTSCer above which shows multis a bit safer overall than monos.

At the same time, as we just saw with that young couple in FL, and another thread here about a Catalina - as people continue to buy decades old monos we will probably see more and more of these keel failures.


----------



## capecodda

IMHO a lot of folks get all hung up on keels falling off, capsizing, running in the southern ocean with series drogues, etc., etc., etc. People talk about these things the same way my friend with the Porsche talks about how fast it will go. Mostly, he just polishes the thing in his driveway.

And that includes me. I don't want to. My idea of an offshore trip is a couple of days out of site of land with a great weather window. Beyond that, the discomfort/fun ratio doesn't work for me. I love daysailing from place to place, anchoring about 4PM for cocktail hours and hanging the grill (hang the grill first, don't ask me how I know). 

So my issue with cruising cats is I don't like the feel of the way they sail, and a couple of weeks them did was not sufficient for me to acquire the taste. We've been all through that, and I get that a lot of people feel different and that's great.

But all this talk about capsizing, keels falling off, etc, doesn't matter for most people. 

Meanwhile, I'll be in the driveway, wax on, wax off.


----------



## chef2sail

I think it’s hard to judge seamanship as a term across different disciplines/ types of boats. These “ great seamanship skills “ exhibited by the muntihull racers mentioned here are without challenge by anyone, however those same captains put on a tanker would not have the requisite superior seamanship skills. posdible that the statement that they have more than people posting on here is not really Accurate either. It takes time to learn certain skills. I am sure if I decided to make the switch to a multi hull boat , I would need to learn some new skills . Coming from a multi hull beach cat to a keel boat required that. Hell I often watch mono hulls gybe uncintrollably putting increased loads on the mast an equipment and shake my head. 

I remember my hobie lessons , and a gybe must be choreographed or you are swallowing seawater . It taught me the correct way to gybe so when I got to the big monohull I used a good technique. 

The two times I chartered the multihull were fun moments. I had enough seamanship skills to keep us safe. I never feared about flipping it even though winds were I no excess of 30 many times. I doubt an experienced monohull boat owner would actually fear flipping a multihull. I would in fact see appropriate caution as they learned the difference in handing of the two types of boats and adjusted. In fact I am sure many would take a conservative approach. I don’t believe current monohull sailors really fear operating multihull. I don’t believe they fear going fast at all. Nor do they fear their keels falling off. I bet the biggest “ fear” in fact is a rigging failure. It does take getting used to steering a multihull. 

Most sailors are not racers, in fact I think only a very small minority are in fact. I appreciate the racers , in fact I did that myself for many years in Annapolis, as it is they who really test limits as well as hone sail trimming skills . MOst cruisers handing multi hulls , just like monohulls like to sail comfortably and safely

It as very comfortable living conditions at anchor. I could see where people would like them. 

There are however some criteria which are present in all types of boats. Safety being one. Racers as as a category test the edges of the windows sometimes as part of their craft. This inevitably may lead to more incidents . 

I am no longer a true racer. The thing which steers me to a monohull is it’s displacement type hull. 
I have no quip about heading our in 30+ winds as I know I won’t be skipping across the type of waves. That wad of lead 5 ft under the boat insures that . I have seen friends retire from a monohull to a trawler and regretted it because of the lack of keelband the Rolling nature of the boat. If/ when that day ever comes I have to motor to get on the water, I will power along in a sailboat. 

Since I mentioned the rigging failure before, one of the reason I like our C&C and other similar boats is the mast is keel stepped. Personally I would not by a deck stepped boat . I have seen what happens when the mast itself fails. I have seen them almost impale the captain/ crew with the bottom of the mast we the sh.t hit the fan. 

I will continue to charter a cat one of our two charters a year, which we do with other couples. When we go by ourselves I like the monohull. 

Because their seems to be an increase in the number of charter cats maybe SN should give them a topic heading all of their own.


----------



## smackdaddy

capecodda said:


> I love daysailing from place to place, anchoring about 4PM for cocktail hours and hanging the grill (hang the grill first, don't ask me how I know).


I believe that's a pretty universally held belief. You either hang the grill before you drink and cook. Or you dive for the grill after you tried to hang it after 4 Dark and Stormies AND you miss dinner.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

colemj said:


> Keels fall off cruising monohulls at the same rate as cruising catamarans flip, but nobody is dreaming about installing retractable pontoons that can shoot out before the boat goes over.
> 
> Mark


That's interesting. You make a very strong statement. Do you have data that support it?

This would be something like 'number of cruising catamarans flipped over the last X years divided by the number of cruising catamarans in the world' compared to 'number of keels fallen off cruising monohulls over the last X years divided by the number of cruising monohulls in the world.'

Where's that data?

I think that would be a real contribution to this thread, much more than the hundreds of pasted videos of 'young punk' bikini babes frolicking on catamarans


----------



## smackdaddy

Mast - there was a post above by smj from a woman who had worked at the NTSB and ran some numbers. That post is here...

A couple of tidbits to your question...



> The rates of actual vessel loss (outside of competition) remained the same for monohulls and multihulls, over many years, with catamarans emerging slightly ahead of other vessels in the last years of available data. Reports of large numbers of catamaran roll-overs are probably anecdotal as accident statistics reveal a (slight) decline, with a slight increase in sinkings among monohulls.


And here was her conclusion...



> My conclusions were impaired by the quality of data, and my proposal of a National Transportation Safety Board Special Study was properly overshadowed by more important issues. But there is enough factual data to prove that cruising multihulls are no more, and possible less dangerous than cruising monohulls in all reported conditions of weather, traffic, and human frailty, regardless of location.


This is probably as close to empirical as you're going to get.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> Mast - there was a post above by smj from a woman who had worked at the NTSB and ran some numbers. That post is here...
> 
> A couple of tidbits to your question...
> 
> And here was her conclusion...
> 
> This is probably as close to empirical as you're going to get.


I had read that page but thanks for including the link, it was convenient to review it again.

Two comments, one general one more specific. The general comment is that Sandra Daugherty, the person who wrote this, emphasized that her 'conclusions were impaired by the quality of data.' So this is not a strong basis to base any conclusions on.

The more specific point: nothing in that posting says *anything anywhere* about the rate of keels falling off on monohulls. So this clearly does not support the statement "Keels fall off cruising monohulls at the same rate as cruising catamarans flip"

So my question remains, what factual data is this statement based on?


----------



## colemj

chef2sail said:


> I think it's hard to judge seamanship as a term across different disciplines/ types of boats. These " great seamanship skills " exhibited by the muntihull racers mentioned here are without challenge by anyone, however those same captains put on a tanker would not have the requisite superior seamanship skills. posdible that the statement that they have more than people posting on here is not really Accurate either.


For accuracy, here is my exact quote (bold emphasis added here):


> I can guarantee that they have more seamanship and experience with *sailing* boats than anyone on this forum.


I never made any statement about tankers or other ships besides sailing boats.

Mark


----------



## colemj

Sandy Daugherty (not Sandra) is a male.

Mark


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

colemj said:


> Sandy Daugherty (not Sandra) is a male.
> 
> Mark


Sorry, Daddie's post said the name was Sandra and I concluded it was a female. My mistake.


----------



## smackdaddy

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> I had read that page but thanks for including the link, it was convenient to review it again.
> 
> Two comments, one general one more specific. The general comment is that Sandra Daugherty, the person who wrote this, emphasized that her 'conclusions were impaired by the quality of data.' So this is not a strong basis to base any conclusions on.
> 
> The more specific point: nothing in that posting says *anything anywhere* about the rate of keels falling off on monohulls. So this clearly does not support the statement "Keels fall off cruising monohulls at the same rate as cruising catamarans flip"
> 
> So my question remains, what factual data is this statement based on?


I think Sandy (who I thought was a chick) already provides the answer to your question in that post. If keels staying on boats is part of the mono safety reports (factual data) then his conclusion stands. If keels falling off of boats has no impact on safety numbers, then there would be a clear problem with that conclusion.

Bottom line, as Sandy states, I don't think some will ever have as clear an answer as they want - simply because the data itself is not that detailed. Yet, overall, I would say Mark's comment is generally backed up by this report. That's my take.


----------



## smj

Another good read from Richard Woods.
http://www.sailingcatamarans.com/index.php/faqs/16-safety-questions/104-sink-or-swim

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> I think Sandy (who I thought was a chick) already provides the answer to your question in that post. If keels staying on boats is part of the mono safety reports (factual data) then his conclusion stands. If keels falling off of boats has no impact on safety numbers, then there would be a clear problem with that conclusion.
> 
> Bottom line, as Sandy states, I don't think some will ever have as clear an answer as they want - simply because the data itself is not that detailed. Yet, overall, I would say Mark's comment is generally backed up by this report. That's my take.


HELLLOOO? There is no mention at all about keels in the posting. How does this 'back up' a conclusion about keels falling off?

By that logic, the posting also supports my conclusion that boating accidents are mainly caused by aliens that have been visiting us for thousands of years. True, it makes no mention of aliens but if aliens visitations are "part of the mono safety reports (factual data) then [my] conclusion stands. If [alien visitations have] no impact on safety numbers, then there would be a clear problem with that conclusion." Therefore, my "comment is generally backed up by this report."


----------



## chef2sail

colemj said:


> For accuracy, here is my exact quote (bold emphasis added here):
> 
> I never made any statement about tankers or other ships besides sailing boats.
> 
> Mark


You missed the point. There are other people in this world and even on Sailnet who have just as good seamanship qualities as they have. You have absolutely no clue of who is behind some if the names on here to make such as sweeping statement. You don't know their experience. Nor do you know their judgement in sailing situations

And if you'd paid attention instead of trying to be right, you'll notice I did give them their due.


----------



## smj

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> HELLLOOO? There is no mention at all about keels in the posting. How does this 'back up' a conclusion about keels falling off?
> 
> By that logic, the posting also supports my conclusion that boating accidents are mainly caused by aliens that have been visiting us for thousands of years. True, it makes no mention of aliens but if aliens visitations are "part of the mono safety reports (factual data) then [my] conclusion stands. If [alien visitations have] no impact on safety numbers, then there would be a clear problem with that conclusion." Therefore, my "comment is generally backed up by this report."


Here's an article by Skip Novak, one of the most well known sailors and racers. He does talk about the monohulls keels falling of but sadly no stats.
http://www.yachtingworld.com/skip-novak-comment/skip-novak-why-a-catamaran-wins-out-70549

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Capt Len

My only windward multi ocean experience is a trip over to the Andamans . A slam ,slam shudder trip most of the way. Faster but less comfortable than my old gaffer. Apparently they go fast and can go to windward too (according to you tube) . Based on this I'm sure I could drive 'er balls to the wall with the best of them and not stand by with a machete at the main sheet. Which is considered by some classic mono hull sailors as prudent seamanship until the sail get to a manageable level as conditions change faster than you can hack. Comparing your adventure to a beach hobie or ultimate racing with a big crowd of rescuers standing by gives confidence to newbi multihullers cruisers who have never seen the action that can overwhelm and overturn . Alls fine until it isn't. Seeing cats drift ashore shows how that works.Should be an offshore multi hull winter race from Victoria to San Diego if you need a test.I have several friends who spent considerable weeks on upside down tris .Two in the North Pacific and one in the Tasman I consider them prudent and careful cruisers who still were overcome by Neptune .If it come down to experience gained on you tube and "here, hold my beer" be sure to record it.


----------



## outbound

So there are centerboarders with internal ballast, boats going back decades with encapsulated keels, and lifting keels. Only monos where keel falling off may be an issue are those with bolt on keels and even here it’s rare.
Similarly flipping a multi is bad form. Used to be said a mono takes care of you ... you take care of a multi. Skip alluded to this. That a moment of inattention and you’re turtle. But with all due regards think with the evolution in heavy weather tactics for multis this is quite rare.

So neither keels falling off nor inversion isn’t how most catastrophes occur for either monos or multis. There are so many other ways for the boat to fail or the souls aboard to get hurt or die. The discussion of these two risks is no longer informative. 

How about moving on and talking about interesting innovations in multihull design or even what features contribute to a good multi seaboat.


----------



## smackdaddy

outbound said:


> So neither keels falling off nor inversion isn't how most catastrophes occur for either monos or multis. There are so many other ways for the boat to fail or the souls aboard to get hurt or die. The discussion of these two risks is no longer informative.
> 
> How about moving on and talking about interesting innovations in multihull design or even what features contribute to a good multi seaboat.


I couldn't agree more.

The reason I continue to look for videos is I want to see the different features on the different boats. And I want to see how various models do in ocean crossings in rough seas, light air, etc. Thus far I've been very, very impressed at the much more comfortable all-round state of the multi in even very harsh conditions. It's amazing - creating its own safety factor in relation to keep the crew rested and ready.

Finding informative videos and stories like this is my current mission. Stay tuned.


----------



## aeventyr60

Getting rest on any boat is part of proper seamanship skills..Can't see these claims as being valid as to the better rest on a catamaran argument. Maybe the cats attract a lower level of experience and the need for more rest?


----------



## WharfRat

aeventyr60 said:


> Getting rest on any boat is part of proper seamanship skills..Can't see these claims as being valid as to the better rest on a catamaran argument. Maybe the cats attract a lower level of experience and the need for more rest?


Maybe .... but at _any_ skill level, basic biology suggests that it's easier to sleep soundly on a wider, flatter surface (like an unheeled queen-sized bed) than a narrow canted surface (like a v-berth with lee cloth while heeled).


----------



## TakeFive

WharfRat said:


> Maybe .... but at _any_ skill level, basic biology suggests that it's easier to sleep soundly on a wider, flatter surface (like an unheeled queen-sized bed) than a narrow canted surface (like a v-berth with lee cloth while heeled).


There are many other axes of boat motion than sideways heeling. I won't go any further with this line of reasoning, because I've never slept on a cat. Have you? If so, share your actual experience. If not, then you're just adding internet speculation (just like me in this case, which I fully admit).

On the topic of sleep comfort, I think only those who have owned or chartered a cat are qualified to speak.


----------



## mstern

smackdaddy said:


> I couldn't agree more.
> 
> The reason I continue to look for videos is I want to see the different features on the different boats. And I want to see how various models do in ocean crossings in rough seas, light air, etc. Thus far I've been very, very impressed at the much more comfortable all-round state of the multi in even very harsh conditions. It's amazing - creating its own safety factor in relation to keep the crew rested and ready.
> 
> Finding informative videos and stories like this is my current mission. Stay tuned.


There was an article in a semi-recent edition of either Sail or Cruising World where a couple described their first long-distance sail in a cat. If I remember correctly, these two were experienced monohull sailors with significant ocean crossings under their belts, but they had never sailed on a cat before and they were excited to give it a go. I think this was a transatlantic delivery they were describing.

I cannot remember the details, but I recall that overall, they didn't like it. Although there was no heeling, there was a different motion that caused at least one of them some discomfort. I'll see if I can dig up the article and share it.

Maybe this cat motion is just something to get used to, or maybe some people are just sensitive to it. To each his own. My own cat experience is limited to some Hobie sailing, none more recent than almost thirty years ago, and one sunset cocktail cruise last summer off of Waikiki beach. I wrote about it here:

http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/295097-exhilarating-cat-sail.html

I didn't notice any unsettling motion in my one big cat ride; just a flat sail on a powerful platform in conditions that would have felt much different on a monohull. I don't want my own cat, but boy, would I love to charter one for a week. Not only would the sailing be exhilarating, but that's about the only way my wife and children would agree to come along.


----------



## smj

mstern said:


> There was an article in a semi-recent edition of either Sail or Cruising World where a couple described their first long-distance sail in a cat. If I remember correctly, these two were experienced monohull sailors with significant ocean crossings under their belts, but they had never sailed on a cat before and they were excited to give it a go. I think this was a transatlantic delivery they were describing.
> 
> I cannot remember the details, but I recall that overall, they didn't like it. Although there was no heeling, there was a different motion that caused at least one of them some discomfort. I'll see if I can dig up the article and share it.
> 
> Maybe this cat motion is just something to get used to, or maybe some people are just sensitive to it. To each his own. My own cat experience is limited to some Hobie sailing, none more recent than almost thirty years ago, and one sunset cocktail cruise last summer off of Waikiki beach. I wrote about it here:
> 
> http://www.sailnet.com/forums/general-discussion-sailing-related/295097-exhilarating-cat-sail.html
> 
> I didn't notice any unsettling motion in my one big cat ride; just a flat sail on a powerful platform in conditions that would have felt much different on a monohull. I don't want my own cat, but boy, would I love to charter one for a week. Not only would the sailing be exhilarating, but that's about the only way my wife and children would agree to come along.


Is this the Atlantic crossing?





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

On the sleeping and comfort thing, I'm just going by the first hand accounts of those who are doing long passages in the videos I've been researching and posting - with a few of them specifically comparing their times on monos to these multis. I'm then also watching the motion of these cats in rough seas - and seeing what's going on inside the boat visually as compared to what I know goes on inside a mono in similar conditions. This certainly bolsters their accounts.

So, that's absolutely factual enough for me. You really don't have to guess or do it yourself before you draw a conclusion if you're willing to listen to those what are actually doing it.


----------



## mstern

smj said:


> Is this the Atlantic crossing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I don't think so. My recollection is that the couple in the article were crossing from east to west, not the other way. I'm at work now, so I can't really dig into it, but I'll try to remember to look for the article when I get home.


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> Is this the Atlantic crossing?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Thanks alot smj. I now have 2 hours of research to do!

An uphill bash across the pond on a 2005 Soubise Freydis 46 (yet another brand I'd never heard of). This will be interesting.


----------



## DotDun

Aft berth on my boat provides a good place to sleep while underway. Maybe not so much in 30kts, 50° off, and 6' short period seas when the pounding starts, although I've been known to sleep OK in those conditions also.


----------



## smj

mstern said:


> I don't think so. My recollection is that the couple in the article were crossing from east to west, not the other way. I'm at work now, so I can't really dig into it, but I'll try to remember to look for the article when I get home.


One more chance?


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> Thanks alot smj. I now have 2 hours of research to do!
> 
> An uphill bash across the pond on a 2005 Soubise Freydis 46 (yet another brand I'd never heard of). This will be interesting.


One of my favorite cats, a LeRouge design


----------



## colemj

chef2sail said:


> You missed the point. There are other people in this world and even on Sailnet who have just as good seamanship qualities as they have. You have absolutely no clue of who is behind some if the names on here to make such as sweeping statement. You don't know their experience. Nor do you know their judgement in sailing situations
> 
> And if you'd paid attention instead of trying to be right, you'll notice I did give them their due.


I didn't miss the point, I was correcting your misstatement of my post to encompass anything other than sailboat seamanship. And I agree, and allow, that many here have much experience and good seamanship.

However, the fact remains that these guys are professionals, sailing is their career, they have been in more oceans and more different and extreme conditions than almost all of us, and have been on more and different types of boats than almost all of us. It doesn't take much to stretch the point a bit that this is overwhelming experience that few outside that profession have.

But what I really wished to accomplish with that post was to state that these guys have seamanship coming out their ears, and flipping an extreme racing boat while driving it on the edge has nothing at all to do with seamanship.

After all, that was the original accusation.

Mark


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> Here's an article by Skip Novak, one of the most well known sailors and racers. He does talk about the monohulls keels falling of but sadly no stats.
> Skip Novak: why a catamaran wins out ? Yachting World
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I also posted an article previously about Stan Honey leading a commission to determine why so many keels were falling off at an alarming rate.

Mark


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> So neither keels falling off nor inversion isn't how most catastrophes occur for either monos or multis. There are so many other ways for the boat to fail or the souls aboard to get hurt or die. The discussion of these two risks is no longer informative.


Bingo! I don't understand the obsession with either for the reasons you state. Both are rare events that do happen, but neither keeps anyone from sailing both types for the same reason everyone still drives a car even though wheels fall off them from time to time, and there are far many more ways to be killed in a car than a wheel falling off.

Now someone's going to ask me for statistics on wheels falling off cars - instead of understanding the point that it is a rare and uninformative event, and traveling by horse instead is obsessing on the issue.

Mark


----------



## colemj

mstern said:


> Maybe this cat motion is just something to get used to, or maybe some people are just sensitive to it.


Both are true. Both are also true for monohulls, as well as for trawlers, and I would guess any type of boat.

Mark


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

colemj said:


> Now someone's going to ask me for statistics on wheels falling off cars - instead of understanding the point that it is a rare and uninformative event, and traveling by horse instead is obsessing on the issue.
> 
> Mark


I suppose you are referring to me as 'someone?' Yes, I indeed would ask you for evidence if you claimed that wheels are falling off cars as the same rate as, say, horseback riders are crushed by their steads. I have no idea if that is true or not but if someone states this categorically, I will ask for evidence.

Your claim was "Keels fall off cruising monohulls at the same rate as cruising catamarans flip". It seems the evidence for this claim is non-existent.


----------



## guitarguy56

In 2008, the International Sailing Federation (ISAF) set up a working party on keel losses, and they found *72* cases since 1984 of boats losing their keels.

If we look closer at those stats, it suggests from 1984 to 2008 keels fell off at the rate of *3 keels per year*... hardly a rare occurrence, and we don't know the rate of keel failures between 2008 to present day.

Keel Failure | XS Sailing


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

guitarguy56 said:


> In 2008, the International Sailing Federation (ISAF) set up a working party on keel losses, and they found *72* cases since 1984 of boats losing their keels.
> 
> If we look closer at those stats, it suggests from 1984 to 2008 keels fell off at the rate of *3 keels per year*... hardly a rare occurrence, and we don't know the rate of keel failures between 2008 to present day.
> 
> Keel Failure | XS Sailing


OK, now we are getting somewhere! So we have one number: 72 keels fallen off between 1984 and 2008. This needs to be adjusted since the original statement refers to 'cruising boats' only. But it is a start.

Three more numbers are missing:

--how many cruising catamarans have capsized in these 24 years?
--how many cruising monohulls (keelboats) are there in the world (average over these 24 years)?
--how many cruising catamarans are there in the world (average over these 24 years)


----------



## colemj

TakeFive said:


> There are many other axes of boat motion than sideways heeling. I won't go any further with this line of reasoning, because I've never slept on a cat. Have you? If so, share your actual experience. If not, then you're just adding internet speculation (just like me in this case, which I fully admit).
> 
> On the topic of sleep comfort, I think only those who have owned or chartered a cat are qualified to speak.


We have over 3,000 nights on board ours in all conditions. I'll state up front the negatives:

1. There will always be certain points of sail and/or certain sea conditions that make sleeping uncomfortable. This is probably true for all types of boats. Most of the discomfort is from pounding due to waves that catch the boat in a manner that they either stuff up under the bridgedeck, or miss one bow/stern in just the right way that they slam the opposite one. Both of these conditions are often solved by slowing down a bit or changing angle a few degrees. Or just put up with it - one does learn to sleep through it, as it is mostly just noise to the person in a berth or a bit of a shudder.

2. Since catamaran hulls are narrow, and their build structures light (but strong), and have little cabinetry, etc built along the sides of the stateroom hull, the noise of water rushing past the hulls is much louder than typically found on a monohull - where the hull is wider, the build typically thicker, and cabinetry helps with sound.

For all other times than #1, and when you get used to (or wear earplugs) for #2, there is a reason why one doesn't see pipe berths, narrow bunks, and lee cloths on catamarans. Most have queen or king sized berths with no precautions for falling out of them.

Yes, all the axis of motion are present on a catamaran, as they are on every type of boat. However, the catamaran experiences, and recovers, these motions very quickly, which is the difference in this regard. Roll starts with one hull lifting a little bit, then the other hull lifts to match it. Pitch starts to occur, then the lightness, low rocker form, and high prismatic stiffens it out. Yawing is reduced by two hulls and two sets of foils. Heaving is probably larger on a catamaran than a mono, but this doesn't really affect sleeping quality until it gets to such an extreme that one should wake up and do something about the boat's relation to the weather.

A person off watch on a catamaran is in a large, mostly flat, bed in a stateroom removed from the rest of the watch and busyness. There is no difference in accommodations or routine when on passage than when at anchor. Coming off watch in the evening, and before going to bed, we take a nice warm shower in a full shower stall without the need to sit down on the floor or stool or hang on tight to something with one hand while trying to shower with the other. Getting into bed nice and clean helps us sleep better, but that part is subjective.

FWIW, I've also spent many nights underway in sleeping in monohulls, and even trawlers.

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> Bingo! I don't understand the obsession with either for the reasons you state. Both are rare events that do happen, but neither keeps anyone from sailing both types for the same reason everyone still drives a car even though wheels fall off them from time to time, and there are far many more ways to be killed in a car than a wheel falling off.
> 
> Now someone's going to ask me for statistics on wheels falling off cars - instead of understanding the point that it is a rare and uninformative event, and traveling by horse instead is obsessing on the issue.
> 
> Mark


I like the last paragraph in Richard Woods article, seems sailing as a whole is a pretty safe hobby.
"According to the official 2001 US Coastguard figures, nearly 500 people died when boating. 350 were in open motor boats, 100 in kayaks/canoes, 50 in personal watercraft. So I guess no one drowned when sailing in 2001 in the USA. In comparison 24 people were killed skiing in British Columbia in the 2008/9 winter, while over 30 people drown each year in their cars in the UK."

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> OK, now we are getting somewhere! So we have one number: 72 keels fallen off between 1984 and 2008. This needs to be adjusted since the original statement refers to 'cruising boats' only. But it is a start.
> 
> Three more numbers are missing:
> 
> --how many cruising catamarans have capsized in these 24 years?
> --how many cruising monohulls (keelboats) are there in the world (average over these 24 years)?
> --how many cruising catamarans are there in the world (average over these 24 years)


Mast, if this is so important to you - why don't you do the research and find out?

There has already been the report by the NTSB guy which says that the Lloyds numbers empirically show this:



> The rates of actual vessel loss (outside of competition) remained the same for monohulls and multihulls, over many years, with catamarans emerging slightly ahead of other vessels in the last years of available data. Reports of large numbers of catamaran roll-overs are probably anecdotal as accident statistics reveal a (slight) decline, with a slight increase in sinkings among monohulls.


So, if the above numbers from Lloyds are accurate, and you take guitar's new count of 72 keel failures - and you assume that when a mono loses the keel it is "lost" just as a flipped multi is "lost" - you have some relatively solid numbers from which to extrapolate. The only distinction remaining is the keel number versus the number of more general sinkings.

Instead of demanding that smj or guitar or any others who are actually providing these numbers here somehow defend the scientific method of the people who put them together - or demand that they find *you* more numbers so that you will be, somehow, convinced...wouldn't it be better for you to find your own facts that counter what has been said and presented here?

What I'm seeing in these numbers being presented is that colemj's statement is pretty damn accurate.


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> Yes, all the axis of motion are present on a catamaran, as they are on every type of boat. However, the catamaran experiences, and recovers, these motions very quickly, which is the difference in this regard. Roll starts with one hull lifting a little bit, then the other hull lifts to match it. Pitch starts to occur, then the lightness, low rocker form, and high prismatic stiffens it out. Yawing is reduced by two hulls and two sets of foils. Heaving is probably larger on a catamaran than a mono, but this doesn't really affect sleeping quality until it gets to such an extreme that one should wake up and do something about the boat's relation to the weather.


This is interesting to me. I'm wondering if the often described "jerkiness" of motion on a cat is actually more a psychological thing. In other words, if you've sailed monos for years and developed your "sea legs" around that motion, you have ingrained mental expectations of that what motion is. If you are at sea on a boat - but its a different type boat with different type motion - your mind still has that one expectation for how your body will anticipate and deal with it. "Jerkiness" would make perfect sense as s description of the motion compared to the mono in that the motion changes on a multi before you expect to based on your expectations of the motion on a mono.

What do you think Mark/smj?


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> I like the last paragraph in Richard Woods article, seems sailing as a whole is a pretty safe hobby.
> "According to the official 2001 US Coastguard figures, nearly 500 people died when boating. 350 were in open motor boats, 100 in kayaks/canoes, 50 in personal watercraft. So I guess no one drowned when sailing in 2001 in the USA. In comparison 24 people were killed skiing in British Columbia in the 2008/9 winter, while over 30 people drown each year in their cars in the UK."
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


And 40,000 people in the US are injured each year using the toilet.

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> And 40,000 people in the US are injured each year using the toilet.
> 
> Mark


Been there done that

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> This is interesting to me. I'm wondering if the often described "jerkiness" of motion on a cat is actually more a psychological thing. In other words, if you've sailed monos for years and developed your "sea legs" around that motion, you have ingrained mental expectations of that what motion is. If you are at sea on a boat - but its a different type boat with different type motion - your mind has one expectation for how your body will anticipate and deal with it. "Jerkiness" would make perfect sense as s description of the motion compared to the mono in that the motion changes on a multi before you expect to based on your expectations of the motion on a mono.
> 
> What do you think Mark?


Yes, monohull expectations and experience is part of the difference, but also the motion of a catamaran is actually "jerky" in the sense that it is quick and cannot be predicted.

Even after 10yrs of full-time living aboard, my body has not adjusted to being able to subconsciously "cancel out" the motions like it can with a monohull.

The saving grace is that this "jerkiness" is not extreme. It is just that at any given time or step, the floor might be an inch or so in a slightly different place than it was just a moment ago. And you don't know which way that will be. It doesn't stop one from walking pretty much normally without much thinking. In extreme conditions, one likes to hold on to something as they move about, or go down steps - but this isn't any different than how I operate on any boat at pretty much all the time. Just a "boy scout" thing for me.

So "jerkiness" is just an aspect of the motion in the same way as heeling or rolling is one in a monohull. Pointing out the difference is psychological, but the difference remains. Some may truly not enjoy it, and some may get seasick from it - but again, this is the same for different motions on all different craft.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Still watching this video SMJ posted. As you'd imagine, I really like their chartplotter set-up...


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> This is interesting to me. I'm wondering if the often described "jerkiness" of motion on a cat is actually more a psychological thing. In other words, if you've sailed monos for years and developed your "sea legs" around that motion, you have ingrained mental expectations of that what motion is. If you are at sea on a boat - but its a different type boat with different type motion - your mind still has that one expectation for how your body will anticipate and deal with it. "Jerkiness" would make perfect sense as s description of the motion compared to the mono in that the motion changes on a multi before you expect to based on your expectations of the motion on a mono.
> 
> What do you think Mark/smj?


As Mark said above, you feel one side quickly dip down but just as quickly come back up again. It's completely different than a mono, short quick motion rather than longer and drawn out. Also depends on point of sail, going upwind quite a bit of motion, downwind, a magic carpet ride!
Also depends on the catamaran. Our boat has quite a bit of motion as she's pretty light. Went sailing on a Lagoon 410 and the motion was more in between a mono and multi, I believe because the Lagoon is quite a bit heavier.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> Mast, if this is so important to you - why don't you do the research and find out?


Isn't that obvious? Because it is not me who made a categorical statement without (so far) any evidence.

If you claim something, be prepared to back it up. Don't ask for others to do that for you.


----------



## smackdaddy

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Isn't that obvious? Because it is not me who made a categorical statement without (so far) any evidence.
> 
> If you claim something, be prepared to back it up. Don't ask for others to do that for you.


It's been backed-up with evidence, mast. Perhaps not to your personal satisfaction - but it's been backed-up with those NTSB numbers.

Yes, one can probably quibble with the *specific terms* of _keel loss_ vs _sinkings_ for monos in those NTSB numbers, but that's just getting into quibbling. Remember, the conclusion was that there were more mono sinkings than multi capsizes in the latter years of the stats. So there's undefined squish there on the mono side.

Unless *you* have numbers to back up this quibbling, I think his statement works in light of the actual evidence presented. And I certainly don't think anyone needs to work any harder to prove it. The numbers are there.

I certainly have no interest in researching this issue anymore. I'm satisfied with the findings from the experts. There are FAR too many other things that interest me about multis. And I'm not at all worried about their overall safety.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> It's been backed-up with evidence, mast. Perhaps not to your personal satisfaction - but it's been backed-up with those NTSB numbers.
> 
> Yes, one can probably quibble with the *specific terms* of _keel loss_ vs _sinkings_ for monos in those NTSB numbers, but that's just getting into quibbling. Remember, the conclusion was that there were more mono sinkings than multi capsizes in the latter years of the stats. So there's undefined squish there on the mono side.
> 
> Unless *you* have numbers to back up this quibbling, I think his statement works in light of the actual evidence presented. And I certainly don't think anyone needs to work any harder to prove it. The numbers are there.
> 
> I certainly have no interest in researching this issue anymore. I'm satisfied with the findings from the experts. There are FAR too many other things that interest me about multis. And I'm not at all worried about their overall safety.


No, you clearly do not understand what this is about.

First, there are zero 'NTSB numbers' in that post. It is all descriptive. Where do you see any 'NTSB numbers?' Muddling the waters again?

Second, and more importantly, I have shown CLEARLY that what the former NTSB person says STRONGLY supports that all boat sinkings are caused by aliens that have been visiting us for thousands of years. You can conclude this just as easily from Sandy's post as whatever you want to believe about keels.

Because the post talks neither about keels nor about aliens. Nor about unicorns or the GDP of Somalia.

Oh, and yes, I do 'quibble' with your argument about the "*specific terms* of _keel loss_ vs _sinkings_." it is not "undefined squish" that not all sinkings of monohulls are due to keels falling off. Do you really need to have THAT explained to you?


----------



## guitarguy56

For anyone griping about safety, here is what Fountaine Pajot has engineered their vessels to:

https://www.fountainepajot.com.au/about-us/safety/

I for one don't think it's the vessel but the crew that needs adjusting to and what can and can't be done with sailing these catamarans.


----------



## smj

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> No, you clearly do not understand what this is about.
> 
> First, there are zero 'NTSB numbers' in that post. It is all descriptive. Where do you see any 'NTSB numbers?' Muddling the waters again?
> 
> Second, and more importantly, I have shown CLEARLY that what the former NTSB person says STRONGLY supports that all boat sinkings are caused by aliens that have been visiting us for thousands of years. You can conclude this just as easily from Sandy's post as whatever you want to believe about keels.
> 
> Because the post talks neither about keels nor about aliens. Nor about unicorns or the GDP of Somalia.
> 
> Oh, and yes, I do 'quibble' with your argument about the "*specific terms* of _keel loss_ vs _sinkings_." it is not "undefined squish" that not all sinkings of monohulls are due to keels falling off. Do you really need to have THAT explained to you?


I'm guessing the vast majority of monohulls sinking has nothing to do with their keels falling of, more to do with poor maintenance of sea cocks, hoses and other items below the waterline that could cause a sinking if they failed.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smj said:


> I'm guessing the vast majority of monohulls sinking has nothing to do with their keels falling of, more to do with poor maintenance of sea cocks, hoses and other items below the waterline that could cause a sinking if they failed.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Couldn't agree more.


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> I'm guessing the vast majority of monohulls sinking has nothing to do with their keels falling of, more to do with poor maintenance of sea cocks, hoses and other items below the waterline that could cause a sinking if they failed.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


That may be absolutely true. I don't know for sure. I'm just saying that "arguing about the technique of arguing" is just not interesting to me at all - but it's a lot of what goes on in these threads. And it really has nothing to do with the actual topic. But let's play this out a bit...

Here is what colemj specifically said:



colemj said:


> Keels fall off cruising monohulls at the same rate as cruising catamarans flip, but nobody is dreaming about installing retractable pontoons that can shoot out before the boat goes over.


Now, to empirically prove this you would need to take guitar's number of keel failures above and look at the ratio of those to some overall number you pick to measure against with other monos (excluding "sinkings" and other issues as you say, smj - like defining whether you count the keel failure if sinking or "loss" does NOT occur, and all kinds of other stuff.)...then you'd have to compare that to the ratio of capsized multis that you, in turn, measure against whatever like numbers/rules on the multi side. Then you'd have to weed out all kinds of _additional_ stuff to make these numbers match as closely as possible.

I'm exhausted just thinking about it and now need a beer.

The NTSB dude mentioned this issue of data fog in the actual Lloyds numbers as a main problem underlying specific conclusions - as the data is just not that detailed.

So, to your point, is colemj's statement "perfectly accurate"? Probably not. But since when has "perfect accuracy" been a standard around here for making a statement? Is it challengable? Sure - always. But if one is going to challenge it, I think it's on them to provide data that contradicts the statement - with results as clear and conclusive as they are demanding.

As I said above, apart from semantics, the real takeaway from all of this is that the numbers point to mutlis being generally safer than monos when it comes to capsizes vs sinkings (the *real *issue at play here). This is *definitely *counter to what is typically posited on sailing forums, including this one. No question.


----------



## smackdaddy

Great video of a crossing from NZ to Tahiti...






This is the Spirited 480 designed by Craig Schonning - sailed by yet another Young Punk couple. Very cool.


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> That may be absolutely true. I don't know for sure. I'm just saying that "arguing about the technique of arguing" is just not interesting to me at all - but it's a lot of what goes on in these threads. And it really has nothing to do with the actual topic. But let's play this out a bit...
> 
> Here is what colemj specifically said:
> 
> Now, to empirically prove this you would need to take guitar's number of keel failures above and look at the ratio of those to some overall number you pick to measure against with other monos (excluding "sinkings" and other issues as you say, smj - like defining whether you count the keel failure if sinking or "loss" does NOT occur, and all kinds of other stuff.)...then you'd have to compare that to the ratio of capsized multis that you, in turn, measure against whatever like numbers/rules on the multi side. Then you'd have to weed out all kinds of _additional_ stuff to make these numbers match as closely as possible.
> 
> I'm exhausted just thinking about it and now need a beer.
> 
> The NTSB dude mentioned this issue of data fog in the actual Lloyds numbers as a main problem underlying specific conclusions - as the data is just not that detailed.
> 
> So, to your point, is colemj's statement "perfectly accurate"? Probably not. But since when has "perfect accuracy" been a standard around here for making a statement? Is it challengable? Sure - always. But if one is going to challenge it, I think it's on them to provide data that contradicts the statement - with results as clear and conclusive as they are demanding.
> 
> As I said above, apart from semantics, the real takeaway from all of this is that the numbers point to mutlis being generally safer than monos when it comes to capsizes vs sinkings (the *real *issue at play here). This is *definitely *counter to what is typically posited on sailing forums, including this one. No question.


Another point to look at, how many monohulls have actually sunk? An argument some make is when a catamaran flips its a news worthy story as there's actually something to look at, when a mono sinks not so. So how many monos have never returned to port nor their owners been seen again, and are these boats put in the category of having sank or just lost at sea.
As I stated before, I think both monos and multis can be equally seaworthy and some monos and multis are a disaster waiting to happen. 
Instead of arguing the seaworthiness between monos and multis maybe argue what makes one cat more seaworthy than another?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> Great video of a crossing from NZ to Tahiti...
> 
> Crossing the South Pacific Ocean (#027) - YouTube
> 
> This is the Spirited 480 designed by Craig Schonning - sailed by yet another Young Punk couple. Very cool.


And the young punk sailing it also built the boat himself, even cooler!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mstern

smj said:


> One more chance?


I don't think so. Unless the author of the magazine article also created a video of the crossing (which I am pretty sure was not mentioned in the magazine), I don't think you'll find this particular crossing on Youtube or any other interweb deal.


----------



## smj

mstern said:


> I don't think so. Unless the author of the magazine article also created a video of the crossing (which I am pretty sure was not mentioned in the magazine), I don't think you'll find this particular crossing on Youtube or any other interweb deal.


Ok, one more guess then I give up!. Either way it's a fun read.
https://www.sailmagazine.com/multihulls/sailing-couple-switched-one-hull-two

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> Instead of arguing the seaworthiness between monos and multis maybe argue what makes one cat more seaworthy than another?


I'm all for that. There are *plenty* of threads about the former. Let's talk about the latter.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> That may be absolutely true. I don't know for sure. I'm just saying that "arguing about the technique of arguing" is just not interesting to me at all - but it's a lot of what goes on in these threads. And it really has nothing to do with the actual topic. But let's play this out a bit...
> 
> Here is what colemj specifically said:
> 
> Now, to empirically prove this you would need to take guitar's number of keel failures above and look at the ratio of those to some overall number you pick to measure against with other monos (excluding "sinkings" and other issues as you say, smj - like defining whether you count the keel failure if sinking or "loss" does NOT occur, and all kinds of other stuff.)...then you'd have to compare that to the ratio of capsized multis that you, in turn, measure against whatever like numbers/rules on the multi side. Then you'd have to weed out all kinds of _additional_ stuff to make these numbers match as closely as possible.
> 
> I'm exhausted just thinking about it and now need a beer.
> 
> The NTSB dude mentioned this issue of data fog in the actual Lloyds numbers as a main problem underlying specific conclusions - as the data is just not that detailed.
> 
> So, to your point, is colemj's statement "perfectly accurate"? Probably not. But since when has "perfect accuracy" been a standard around here for making a statement? Is it challengable? Sure - always. But if one is going to challenge it, I think it's on them to provide data that contradicts the statement - with results as clear and conclusive as they are demanding.
> 
> As I said above, apart from semantics, the real takeaway from all of this is that the numbers point to mutlis being generally safer than monos when it comes to capsizes vs sinkings (the *real *issue at play here). This is *definitely *counter to what is typically posited on sailing forums, including this one. No question.


Muddling the waters again, with fake complexity.

In post #317, I gave you a very simple procedure for verifying or falsifying the statement "Keels fall off cruising monohulls at the same rate as cruising catamarans flip." It requires nothing more than 3rd-grade arithmetics. You remember the rule of three, don't you?

That's all it takes. So stop making things up.


----------



## guitarguy56

Don't understand why it is so hard to do some online research into the numbers:



> For example, in the 400+ modern catamarans that Seawind have launched in the past 20 years, they have never had a boat capsize...


https://www.multihullcentral.com/do-all-catamarans-capsize/

Now this is but one company and I am sure other catamaran manufacturers keep this same data... what does it say about their safety? Plenty.

Carry on but I'd rather read the positives of sailing these vessels than the current discussion.


----------



## smackdaddy

Still enjoying this video smj posted earlier. Here she is talking about the issues of waves hitting the bridgedeck/hulls as described above...


----------



## smackdaddy

guitarguy56 said:


> Don't understand why it is so hard to do some online research into the numbers:
> 
> https://www.multihullcentral.com/do-all-catamarans-capsize/
> 
> Now this is but one company and I am sure other catamaran manufacturers keep this same data... what does it say about their safety? Plenty.
> 
> Carry on but I'd rather read the positives of sailing these vessels than the current discussion.


Agreed. I have no idea what the real point of all that is anymore. I'm certainly moving on.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

guitarguy56 said:


> Don't understand why it is so hard to do some online research into the numbers:
> 
> https://www.multihullcentral.com/do-all-catamarans-capsize/
> 
> Now this is but one company and I am sure other catamaran manufacturers keep this same data... what does it say about their safety? Plenty.
> 
> Carry on but I'd rather read the positives of sailing these vessels than the current discussion.


Well, just to be fair: It is nice that none of their 400 boats ever capsized. But to keep things in perspective, Catalina built in excess of 60,000 monohulls and to my knowledge not a single one of them lost their keel.

As you are saying, just one manufacturer indeed.

Edited: Now here's a challenge for someone good at googling: How many cruising catamarans have ever existed in the world, let's say since the 1970s? I am picking this number because I would not be surprised if this number were smaller than the number of monohulls that were built by a single mid-sized production boat builder. Like Catalina which was founded in 1969.


----------



## smackdaddy

Here you go Mast...

LMGTFY

Have fun.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> Here you go Mast...
> 
> LMGTFY
> 
> Have fun.


Yes, great fun: The first hit is this:

Search Results
Multihull Popularity and Interesting Designs - Page 38 - SailNet ...
Sailnet.com › SailNet Community › On Board › Boat Review and Purchase Forum
39 mins ago - Edited: Now here's a challenge for someone good at googling: How many cruising catamarans have ever existed in the world, let's say since the 1970s? I am picking this number because I would not be surprised if this number were smaller than the number of monohulls that were built by a single mid-sized ...

Boy, google is FAST!!!

Unfortunately, the question is not answered in any of the next hits :frown


----------



## smackdaddy

You already went through all 132K results? Impressive! Heh.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> You already went through all 132K results? Impressive! Heh.


Nope, I said 'the next hits.' I am not good at googling.

But you are the king of google-fu, can't you figure that out?

Seriously, this for one would be a real contribution to a thread entitled "Multihull Popularity and Interesting Designs". You posted early in this thread the rate of increase in catamaran numbers so it seems it should be easy for you to quantify how 'popular' they actually are.

Like, how many have ever been built in the era of mass production boat building, since (say) 1960 or 1970?


----------



## smj

guitarguy56 said:


> Don't understand why it is so hard to do some online research into the numbers:
> 
> https://www.multihullcentral.com/do-all-catamarans-capsize/
> 
> Now this is but one company and I am sure other catamaran manufacturers keep this same data... what does it say about their safety? Plenty.
> 
> Carry on but I'd rather read the positives of sailing these vessels than the current discussion.


And that was 6 years ago. Still no capsizes, sinkings or loss of rigs to date.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Well, just to be fair: It is nice that none of their 400 boats ever capsized. But to keep things in perspective, Catalina built in excess of 60,000 monohulls and to my knowledge not a single one of them lost their keel.
> 
> As you are saying, just one manufacturer indeed.
> 
> Edited: Now here's a challenge for someone good at googling: How many cruising catamarans have ever existed in the world, let's say since the 1970s? I am picking this number because I would not be surprised if this number were smaller than the number of monohulls that were built by a single mid-sized production boat builder. Like Catalina which was founded in 1969.


That's all the boats Catalina built from 8' and up. Does that mean we can use all the beach cats in determining how many catamarans have been built? And really does it matter?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> Well, just to be fair: It is nice that none of their 400 boats ever capsized. But to keep things in perspective, Catalina built in excess of 60,000 monohulls and to my knowledge not a single one of them lost their keel.
> 
> As you are saying, just one manufacturer indeed.
> 
> Edited: Now here's a challenge for someone good at googling: How many cruising catamarans have ever existed in the world, let's say since the 1970s? I am picking this number because I would not be surprised if this number were smaller than the number of monohulls that were built by a single mid-sized production boat builder. Like Catalina which was founded in 1969.


Ouch! A Catalina 30 lost its keel!
http://cruising.sailboatowners.com/cgi-bin/bbs62x/webbbs_config.pl/md/read/id/203795

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## WharfRat

https://www.hobie.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=22746&view=next

And I concur with everyone that finds this meaningless / unhelpful.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smj said:


> That's all the boats Catalina built from 8' and up. Does that mean we can use all the beach cats in determining how many catamarans have been built? And really does it matter?
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Fair point. We are talking cruising boats, don't know what a suitable cut-off in length is. Maybe 25'? 
Don't know how many of the 60,000 Catalinas fulfill that.


----------



## smackdaddy

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> But you are the king of google-fu, can't you figure that out?


Yes - I'm very good at it. And yes I could figure it out as I usually do. But I have to be interested in the subject. I'm not at all interested in this particular subject. It's your thing. I'm interested in multi designs, features, capabilities, etc. So I'll leave it to you.

PS - As you say, I've already provided market data as to their growing popularity - with quantification. Just look back at the first few pages. I just don't need more convincing.


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

smackdaddy said:


> Yes - I'm very good at it. And yes I could figure it out as I usually do. But I have to be interested in the subject. I'm not at all interested in this particular subject. It's your thing. I'm interested in multi designs, features, capabilities, etc. So I'll leave it to you.
> 
> PS - As you say, I've already provided market data as to their growing popularity - with quantification. Just look back at the first few pages. I just don't need more convincing.


I have a feeling I know WHY you are not interested in how many cruising multihulls there are. You may not like the result. I know that you posted data about growth. But if you start from a very low base, it is very easy to grow very fast so growth data by themselves mean nothing.

But, you know, I have really nothing against multihulls. I only got into this conversation because of a flaw in logic in one posting. At some point, nearly 20 years ago, long before they became (according to your postings here) THE THING for your young punks, I was pondering buying one.

Carry on.


----------



## smackdaddy

Can you guys tell what make of cat this is? Older Outremer?






It looks like they completed this passage then headed back to Mexico where they bought a tri-maran project and are trying to fully re-fit it as a zero emissions boat. Kind of interesting I suppose.


----------



## DotDun

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> I have a feeling I know WHY you are not interested in how many cruising multihulls there are. You may not like the result. I know that you posted data about growth. But if you start from a very low base, it is very easy to grow very fast so growth data by themselves mean nothing.
> 
> But, you know, I have really nothing against multihulls. I only got into this conversation because of a flaw in logic in one posting. At some point, nearly 20 years ago, long before they became (according to your postings here) THE THING for your young punks, I was pondering buying one.
> 
> Carry on.


Hmm! The recent Miami Boat Show, the same amount (or more) catamarans than monohulls on display. Why are companies spending marketing dollars on catamarans and not spending the same amount on monohulls?

Are they stupid?

Or do they know something you don't???


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> Ok, one more guess then I give up!. Either way it's a fun read.
> https://www.sailmagazine.com/multihulls/sailing-couple-switched-one-hull-two
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Great article! Just a snip...



> As the sun dropped below the western horizon one evening in December 2014, we watched the parting glow from the cockpit of Archer, our Outremer 51 catamaran. We were anchored in Bequia's Admiralty Bay, our first island stop after completing the ARC+ rally from Gran Canaria to St. Lucia via the Cape Verde islands. When darkness fell, we watched the masthead lights of the monohulls anchored nearby whip metronomically back and forth in the harbor swell. Unaffected by the motion of the sea, Archer sat quietly.
> 
> Four months earlier, after more than three decades of sailing monohulls across oceans, to the Caribbean, and up and down the East Coast of the United States, we had begun our transition to a catamaran. We were looking for a change-and a challenge. We thought we might be able to cruise farther into the future on a cat, and we wanted to be able to invite our grandsons and their parents to visit us comfortably in the added space of a multihull.
> 
> Sailing and living aboard a cat is, in some ways, very similar to cruising on a monohull. After all, sailing is sailing, and the same principles apply to both types of boats. But all boats are different, as we have experienced when we changed monohulls in the past.
> 
> Speed has always been important to us. It's not that we are racers, but the boat that goes faster gets into port sooner. The boat that gets into port sooner avoids the next squall or approaching front. And cruisers on faster boats have more time to explore their destinations than those who spend more time at sea. On our last monohull, a Saga 48 named Altair, we consistently arrived in port among the top 10 to 15 percent of the boats we sailed with. We met that same expectation with Archer in the 2014 ARC+ rally.
> 
> To be clear, Archer is a cruising catamaran, designed by Outremer Yachting to combine performance-enhancing characteristics like daggerboards with comfortable accommodations designed for a cruising couple and their guests. We are not flying hulls and defying gravity when we sail, and we certainly are not suffering with pipe berths and compromised living spaces.
> 
> ...
> 
> The motion on a cat is different from that of a monohull. Sometimes, it is noisier, too. Frequently the waves and swells hit one hull from one angle and the other hull from another. As our boat mate Tim Szabo explained, "Once one 'gets it' &#8230; the quicker, shorter motion &#8230; you realize it is a sailboat too, but one in which all the sea routines are easier and getting around is much more comfortable. Lots of space to be alone, but together, too." Before sailing on Archer, Tim completed an Atlantic Circle and many thousands of ocean miles on his Saga 43, Kinship.
> 
> ...
> 
> But in the end, the biggest difference is that we generally sail about 2 knots faster than we used to on Altair, more easily and also more comfortably. That's hard to beat!
> 
> Rick and Julie Palm have sailed together since 1980 on a succession of monohulls before jumping into the multihull world












People who are genuinely interested should read this one.


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> Can you guys tell what make of cat this is? Older Outremer?
> 
> Sailing dream - South pacific crossing on a catamaran - YouTube
> 
> It looks like they completed this passage then headed back to Mexico where they bought a tri-maran project and are trying to fully re-fit it as a zero emissions boat. Kind of interesting I suppose.


Edel 38.








I'm pretty sure they bought an Endeavour 30 catamaran in Panama City Fl. And sailed it to Australia before this trip.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatal


----------



## smj

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> I have a feeling I know WHY you are not interested in how many cruising multihulls there are. You may not like the result. I know that you posted data about growth. But if you start from a very low base, it is very easy to grow very fast so growth data by themselves mean nothing.
> 
> But, you know, I have really nothing against multihulls. I only got into this conversation because of a flaw in logic in one posting. At some point, nearly 20 years ago, long before they became (according to your postings here) THE THING for your young punks, I was pondering buying one.
> 
> Carry on.


Multihull growth, specifically catamarans has absolutely exploded in the last 20 years. For the most part I personally don't see any progression in the designs of the newer popular production catamarans. They are getting larger both in length and height and heavier per foot as well as the hulls getting wider. This makes for a boat with HUGE interiors which is what the market is driving, but makes for a very cumbersome vessel, something catamarans aren't supposed to be. But they still seem to cross oceans comfortably. 
I see the opposite in the more modern monohull designs. They also seem to be gaining interior space, but their performance also seems to be improving, and in my opinion starting to look damn sexy!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

Here's an older Freydis 49 catamaran.









And here's a newer Lagoon 50 catamaran.









I much prefer the older Freydis over the newer Lagoon, maybe I'm just old fashioned.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> Here's an older Freydis 49 catamaran.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And here's a newer Lagoon 50 catamaran.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I much prefer the older Freydis over the newer Lagoon, maybe I'm just old fashioned.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


I'm with you smj. Aesthetically the Freydis just more pleasing to me. The Leopard is starting to look too cruise-shippy. That said, the bridge-deck center V may help with that serious banging in that video of the crossing above. That was pretty pronounced. And what was going on with the rigging on that boat??? Jeez!


----------



## smackdaddy

It's amazing what these Young Punks can do with boats these days...


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> Multihull growth, specifically catamarans has absolutely exploded in the last 20 years. For the most part I personally don't see any progression in the designs of the newer popular production catamarans. They are getting larger both in length and height and heavier per foot as well as the hulls getting wider. This makes for a boat with HUGE interiors which is what the market is driving, but makes for a very cumbersome vessel, something catamarans aren't supposed to be. But they still seem to cross oceans comfortably.
> I see the opposite in the more modern monohull designs. They also seem to be gaining interior space, but their performance also seems to be improving, and in my opinion starting to look damn sexy!


I agree that modern monos are going through an evolutionary change for the better, and some of them really interest me. Boy, they are getting some hate from other mono people, though.

I also agree that modern catamarans seem to have stagnated in design by the big boys, and are about as boxy as they can get, but there still is a lot of good looking and good performing boats by smaller companies and designers.

Not all of the boxy designs are poor performers, though. Leopard, for example, brought in Morelli and Melvin a few years ago to restart their designs. Their new boats are almost a complete shoebox above the water, but below the water, M&M did some pretty good work to make these boats move well. They actually have narrower hulls with little rocker, shallow depth, and long waterlines below the water, while bumping the hulls out well above the waterline in a way provides good reserve buoyancy without creating a lot of drag or noise. I've been out sailing with these designs in full cruising mode and weight and was surprised at how well they perform.

And wide hulls aren't necessarily bad. As an example, we have narrow hulls and are quite a good performer - as long as we keep it very light. Right now, with everything we own on board and no discipline to stop loading it up, we are 6" below waterline. We are also a good 1.5kt slower in good winds, much slower in light winds, and don't point as well, as we did when we used the boat seasonally and it was lighter and on its design waterline.

So Lagoons (for example) may be fat and heavy, but the hulls are designed for being fat and heavy. They aren't performance boats in that sense, but they perform the same light as they do fully (over)loaded for cruising.

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> I agree that modern monos are going through an evolutionary change for the better, and some of them really interest me. Boy, they are getting some hate from other mono people, though.
> 
> I also agree that modern catamarans seem to have stagnated in design by the big boys, and are about as boxy as they can get, but there still is a lot of good looking and good performing boats by smaller companies and designers.
> 
> Not all of the boxy designs are poor performers, though. Leopard, for example, brought in Morelli and Melvin a few years ago to restart their designs. Their new boats are almost a complete shoebox above the water, but below the water, M&M did some pretty good work to make these boats move well. They actually have narrower hulls with little rocker, shallow depth, and long waterlines below the water, while bumping the hulls out well above the waterline in a way provides good reserve buoyancy without creating a lot of drag or noise. I've been out sailing with these designs in full cruising mode and weight and was surprised at how well they perform.
> 
> And wide hulls aren't necessarily bad. As an example, we have narrow hulls and are quite a good performer - as long as we keep it very light. Right now, with everything we own on board and no discipline to stop loading it up, we are 6" below waterline. We are also a good 1.5kt slower in good winds, much slower in light winds, and don't point as well, as we did when we used the boat seasonally and it was lighter and on its design waterline.
> 
> So Lagoons (for example) may be fat and heavy, but the hulls are designed for being fat and heavy. They aren't performance boats in that sense, but they perform the same light as they do fully (over)loaded for cruising.
> 
> Mark


You're right and I was talking about the main producers of catamarans these days. The charter cats are ruling, and to be honest it seems some people don't realize there are other catamarans available that aren't produced by the big 3.
I think the cruising mentality has changed. People find it hard nowadays to be adventuresome without a washer dryer, dish washer, Ice maker and AC with generator, otherwise it's just camping. And thus the wide hulls to carry the load. 
If you look at the 2 boats I used as a comparison, the Freydis 49 weighs 16,500lbs and the Lagoon 50 weighs 46,000lbs.. Probably a good enough reason for the Lagoons hulls to be so wide! We once sailed on a Lagoon 410 which was kept somewhat light and had $35,000 worth of tech sails. We had 18-25 kts of wind and never hit double digits. It did handle the 6-8 ft. seas well as you expect with its weight and makes a good cruising boat.
I wonder if M&M actually like designing the new Leopards? I'm sure it's a paycheck but at the end of the day you have to look at what you've done and feel some pride. 
This of course is just my opinion. I think whatever one decides to purchase, if it gets them out on the water and they enjoy it thats what counts.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

smj said:


> You're right and I was talking about the main producers of catamarans these days. The charter cats are ruling, and to be honest it seems some people don't realize there are other catamarans available that aren't produced by the big 3.
> I think the cruising mentality has changed. People find it hard nowadays to be adventuresome without a washer dryer, dish washer, Ice maker and AC with generator, otherwise it's just camping. And thus the wide hulls to carry the load.
> If you look at the 2 boats I used as a comparison, the Freydis 49 weighs 16,500lbs and the Lagoon 50 weighs 46,000lbs.. Probably a good enough reason for the Lagoons hulls to be so wide! We once sailed on a Lagoon 410 which was kept somewhat light and had $35,000 worth of tech sails. We had 18-25 kts of wind and never hit double digits. It did handle the 6-8 ft. seas well as you expect with its weight and makes a good cruising boat.
> I wonder if M&M actually like designing the new Leopards? I'm sure it's a paycheck but at the end of the day you have to look at what you've done and feel some pride.
> This of course is just my opinion. I think whatever one decides to purchase, if it gets them out on the water and they enjoy it thats what counts.
> On a side note, I'm sure you miss all the Multihull "discussions" at CF!
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## mstern

smj said:


> Ok, one more guess then I give up!. Either way it's a fun read.
> https://www.sailmagazine.com/multihulls/sailing-couple-switched-one-hull-two
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Nope. But I admire your perseverance!

I got home late last night and forgot to look. To find this article, I'll have to search the archives of the magazines on line. I've never done that before, but I'm guessing I'll have to sign in as a subscriber (which I've also never done before), so this may get involved. Fair warning: if it gets too involved, I'm probably just going to give up. You'll have to take my word for it that the article exists and that it says what I remember. :wink


----------



## mstern

smackdaddy said:


> Here you go Mast...
> 
> LMGTFY
> 
> Have fun.


I've never seen that before! Cool!

I clicked on one of the hits that produced, thinking it might be the article I referenced earlier. No joy in that sense, but I think this particular article encapsulates a lot of what you all have been saying about the pros and cons of cats vs. monos in a very concise, readable format.

https://www.cruisingworld.com/sailboats/why-cat


----------



## smj

After rereading my previous post I realize I'm sounding like the old grey beard I discussed earlier.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

mstern said:


> I've never seen that before! Cool!
> 
> I clicked on one of the hits that produced, thinking it might be the article I referenced earlier. No joy in that sense, but I think this particular article encapsulates a lot of what you all have been saying about the pros and cons of cats vs. monos in a very concise, readable format.
> 
> https://www.cruisingworld.com/sailboats/why-cat


good article!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> I wonder if M&M actually like designing the new Leopards? I'm sure it's a paycheck but at the end of the day you have to look at what you've done and feel some pride.


Funny, I have thought the same thing. M&M seem to have work coming out their ears, with radical new designs, expensive performance models, and an active professional racing design group. I was surprised to see them start to do production catamaran design, but maybe that payed exceptionally well or let them expand. Similarly, VPLP have been doing Lagoon design forever, while maintaining their well-known performance and racing work.

Maybe for both, it is the bread and butter that allow them to have the gravy.

M&M's Leopard work seems to actually be trying to do something right. VPLP's recent Lagoon work makes me think they somehow lost the rights to their name/company.

Mark


----------



## outbound

It’s interesting to me you see the same dichotomy in power and mono design as in cat. In power you see massive wide heavy trawlers like Norhavn, Selene, Cape Scott and Seaton but on the other side FPBs from newly retired Dashews, LRC 58s, Ed Joys Lyman Morse Ranger and the like. Narrow and light so easily driven versus heavy and wide built like a brick ****e house. Monos with the pizza pie above water profiles but these boats are really narrow at water plane and light once heeled versus the brick outhouse mentality of “classic” design. Sure there are outliers like the narrow heavy cherubinis but you get the gist of what I’m saying. Given all boats are comprimises you either stay in the water and carry three sets of spares, huge tankage, enough tools to build a boat let alone fix it or float on the water and forgo the museum furniture wood interior and a few toys.
Same dichotomy occurs with ride. Been on heavy displacement trawlers and monos in a seaway. They shoulder the waves aside and don’t stall smacking into them but they do roll. Very different on performance multis or modern long range narrow aluminum trawlers where your feet go airborne if you’re not prudent. Still think the wide hulled multis are the worst of both worlds.
Have had occasion to be in a seaway on the light boats. Without ever recalling any banging into things when you strip you find black and blues on out side of arms, legs and hips. Admittedly I’m a klutz but it’s a different mindset when moving around. Neither is better just different. We were loaned a tri from a friend who owns a multihull dealership in Wareham for a week. I loved it. Wife hated it. The above links mentioned noise down below but she found the singing of the rigging when going at speed most disconcerting when on deck. Different strokes for different folks and different boats for different sailors.


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> We were loaned a tri from a friend who owns a multihull dealership in Wareham for a week. I loved it. Wife hated it. The above links mentioned noise down below but she found the singing of the rigging when going at speed most disconcerting when on deck.


Was it synthetic rigging? We were recently anchored next to a new catamaran with all synthetic rigging and that stuff howled in the wind. I thought they were running a loud generator or engine. The owners said at times it was so loud in the aft staterooms that they slept in the smaller forward bunk. This doesn't seem right to me, and something that should be addressed, but maybe it is the nature of synthetic rigging? We have dyneema runners that sing when loaded, but they are just bare dyneema. The catamaran had a shroud of some type over their rigging.

Otherwise, I don't see why normal steel rigging would make more noise on a trimaran or catamaran than a monohull. Ours doesn't, and I've never heard it from others.

On the other hand, if it was normal whistling due to wind speed because the boat was going very fast, then that is probably just inherent with going fast.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Going back to our earlier conversation about rig design with capsize limits in mind...this is from the Cruising World article linked by someone above. It's from a guy who has done 14K miles on his Dolphin 460...



> That said, one must exercise prudent seamanship when heading offshore in a cat. Harriet and I know that it's "game over, wait for rescue" if we're stupid enough to flip the boat. However, on Hands that would mean flying a full main and jib, sheeted tight, in 50-plus knots of wind on the beam-but note that the main shroud is designed to fail before the boat can be overturned. And let's get real: If our seamanship is that bad, we shouldn't be out there. On any boat.


So at least Dolphin cats apparently DO design the shroud strength with capsize forces in mind.


----------



## smackdaddy

There was also criticism from observation of a monohull sailor (either in this thread or another) about how uncomfortable cats "look" at anchor. Here is that question answered in this same CW article from above from a guy who actually knows for sure...



> 3 Questions We Wish People Would Ask
> 
> 1. How's a cat at anchor?
> Considering that most cruisers spend 99 percent (OK, maybe only 98 percent) of their time at anchor, this isn't a dumb question. The simple answer is: Cats shine at anchor. They don't roll; when the dinner plates go flying on the monohull next door, the worst you'll get is a waddle. At anchor or on a mooring with a bridle led to the tip of each bow, cats barely "sail" like a monohull can. On Hands, we rode out a gale on a mooring to leeward of a 44-foot performance cruising monohull. While they tacked continually through 140 degrees, sailing back and forth, heeling to each gust, we tacked through only 30 degrees and stayed flat. Also, all cats have a safe-at-sea, convenient, out-of-the-way spot between the sterns for hoisting and stowing the ship's tender. And finally, the "loading dock" cutaway-stern design of modern cats means that tender-to-boat access is superior to that of most monohulls.


----------



## smackdaddy

And finally, this...



> 3. Would you go back to a monohull?
> No-and we haven't met any cat sailors who would. The first time Harriet and I went long-distance cruising, in the 1980s, we sailed a 15,000-mile route three-quarters of the way around the Pacific on board a heavy-displacement, full-keeled cutter. When we decided in 2006 to go cruising again, we approached the question of which type of boat to get with an open mind. After a lot of research that included hands-on testing, we chose two hulls-and we're glad we did. But since then, we've found that there's an inevitable one-two combination of ignorance and prejudice that cat owners run up against. Ours occurred when a veteran cruiser took a tour of Hands-during which he referred to our hulls as "pontoons"-and ended up announcing, "I could never get a cat. They just aren't real boats."
> 
> But the majority of monohull sailors are indeed curious, if cautious, about cats for cruising. They wonder, while trying to sift through anti-cat myths and pro-cat hyperbole, about these odd-looking craft. Cat sailors, meanwhile, have already discovered that there's another way to go cruising. They know that it's possible to sail flat and fast and safe and to cruise with all the comforts of home. So is it crazy for cruising sailors to consider buying two hulls instead of one? The journey starts with an open mind.


https://www.cruisingworld.com/sailboats/why-cat

Yep - I'll take the word of those who know. It's enough for me.


----------



## smackdaddy

Beautiful boat, incredible footage, great music...


----------



## paulinnanaimo

It's all good smackdaddy, but put me in that scene at half my age and I could have a great time on a raft.


----------



## TakeFive

> anti-cat myths and pro-cat hyperbole


Perfect description of 80% of this thread.


----------



## aeventyr60

TakeFive said:


> There are many other axes of boat motion than sideways heeling. I won't go any further with this line of reasoning, because I've never slept on a cat. Have you? If so, share your actual experience. If not, then you're just adding internet speculation (just like me in this case, which I fully admit).
> 
> On the topic of sleep comfort, I think only those who have owned or chartered a cat are qualified to speak.


Yes and I didn't find I got any better rest either. the factory supplied mattresses on the Lagoon 38 are painfully thin. The ventilation sucks in the tropics. We had to go out and sleep on the trampoline for a few hours until it cooled down. With only one fan and the small opening port it was
unbearable. The herky jerky motion is also discomforting. The slap slap of water against the hulls was not soothing either .

The tiny little cabinets in the head would barely hold my shaving kit. Not sure how women visitors would get along in the claustraphobic sized head either. If your gal is a plus sized she is not going to be able to fit through the doors either. Might not be able to sit down..


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> So at least Dolphin cats apparently DO design the shroud strength with capsize forces in mind.


No. This belief is unfounded, but it is one that is propagated often, and deeply believed by many. However, it is a faith, and not an engineering design.

I have met many people who believe their rigging is designed to go before the boat tips over. When asked why they believe this, I have yet to hear, or be pointed to, anything that could be considered valid. Most just say that is the way cruising catamarans are designed. Some say that their dealer/broker told them this, and further their conviction by pointing out that their dealer/broker has been in the business for many years. Being a magazine contributor, or having sailed X number of miles, doesn't shield one from this, nor provide knowledge.

Nobody has ever directed me to actual manufacturer information or engineering data saying this, and I have never found any on my own. I hear it most from brokers and dealers, but when pressed, they only tell me that "everyone knows this", or point out their many years in the business.

It is quite possible that a rig can fail before the boat capsizes, but this is just by chance, a weak component, or lack of maintenance. Similar to a rig failing on a monohull when rolled - sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't.

Again, the reasoning comes down to how the rig would be designed to fail this way, and what the risks are. Rigs don't just magically pop off and go away. A dismasting can be a fatal event, and at minimum a potentially very dangerous one. It could be argued that a dismasting has more potential to kill or harm someone than a capsize. It could also result in the boat sinking outright instead of staying afloat inverted. Manufacturers would be on the hook for a purposeful failure design that killed or harmed someone. There would at least be a disclaimer clause somewhere in a contract addressing this.

In the other direction, capsize can be caused by a combination of wind and waves without undue stress on rigging components. It also is rarely caused by full sails sheeted tight in high winds on the beam (the author's case for failure). In these (more common) potentials for capsize, the rigging doesn't come into play at all.

But let's say it is engineered this way. Then the question is how and when do you want that failure to occur? Do you want the mast to fall forward and potentially trip the boat over, or backwards and potentially kill the people in the cockpit, or sideways and hole a hull and potentially cause the boat to sink? Should it fail right as a hull begins to lift - where one has ample time to correct the situation and avoid a problem, or should it only fail when one has lost control and the boat is going over anyway? The middle ground between those two points when a rig failure could help is a very short time and would require precise engineering of many, many components working together.

And this isn't even putting on an engineer's hat (I'm not an engineer). Those that are can probably immediately see the multiple issues with taking many rigging components with broad ranges of working and breaking loads, each that handles different forces in different directions and different ways, and putting them all together in a package that has a precisely defined and implemented "fuse" point. Keeping in mind the normal manufacturing variances of both the rigging components and the boat itself.

Of course, once the boat and rigging is finally setup this way, one could never change any aspect of the boat - like taking on extra water or provisioning, or adding extra crew members. And then when it became time to re-rig or get new sails, the engineering would have to start all over again.

I would personally be very happy to discover that this old saw was indeed true and backed up by engineering design and rationale. I know for a fact it isn't the case for our boat, but might be willing to redo the rigging with an engineer if it could be made to fail only at the critical moment and not at any other time.

But so far logic and reasoning leads me to believe otherwise. Of course, I am very open to changing my mind on this, because finding it true would impact our lives in a favorable way. So if anyone does have different information, or can point me to relevant data, I would be appreciative.

Mark


----------



## colemj

BTW, that is an otherwise good article that addresses well some points brought up in this thread. The author does a much better job describing the difference in motion than I have here. 

Mark


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> There was also criticism from observation of a monohull sailor (either in this thread or another) about how uncomfortable cats "look" at anchor. Here is that question answered in this same CW article from above from a guy who actually knows for sure...


Yeah, I just let that comment pass. It was absurdly unfounded. Two days ago we were in an anchorage with catamarans and monohulls and a small swell worked its way in. Us three cat owners were on a boat together and only noticed the swell because we saw the monos rolling like metronomes. Within minutes, the monos were pulling anchor and heading out to somewhere more calm for them. We experience this situation time and time again.

The single anchoring condition where a catamaran is worse than a monohull is a strong wind opposite a strong current. In this situation, most monohulls sit to the current quite happily. Most catamarans don't know if they are fish or bird, and will swing wildly back and forth between the two directions. Once, anchored off Charleston SC, we were in these conditions and it was like being on a Tilt-O-Whirl.

Mark


----------



## colemj

aeventyr60 said:


> Yes and I didn't find I got any better rest either. the factory supplied mattresses on the Lagoon 38 are painfully thin. The ventilation sucks in the tropics. We had to go out and sleep on the trampoline for a few hours until it cooled down. With only one fan and the small opening port it was
> unbearable. The herky jerky motion is also discomforting. The slap slap of water against the hulls was not soothing either .
> 
> The tiny little cabinets in the head would barely hold my shaving kit. Not sure how women visitors would get along in the claustraphobic sized head either. If your gal is a plus sized she is not going to be able to fit through the doors either. Might not be able to sit down..


None of this has anything to do with catamarans in general - only a specific catamaran model, how it was equipped, and how you personally reacted to it.

Mark


----------



## aeventyr60

colemj said:


> None of this has anything to do with catamarans in general - only a specific catamaran model, how it was equipped, and how you personally reacted to it.
> 
> Mark


I'll cry BS on that! This is a discussion on catamarans correct? My reaction? Yes, based on actual experience. I know your more comfy with the cut and paste guys, and heaven forbid if anyone had a less then steller review or experience on any sort of catamaran.

Particular model? Of course and a very popular one at that. How else could any one evaluate a particular model of any boat with out mentioning how is was equipped? Should me and my gal have just sweated it out in a kleenex box sized cabin? Her feelings and opinions not important?

Why talk generalities? I think chall and smack have talked about a lot of specific design features. What gives with you? Out of your comfort zone?


----------



## colemj

I only meant to point out that the conversation about the degree of restfulness on catamarans was a general one, and was brought into question. You were even the poster that made the topic general, and postulated that there was no difference, and catamarans attract a lower level of experience and need for rest. 

Above, you mentioned an experience with a specific model, which I merely pointed out was not a general quality of catamarans in this regard. You seemed to have presented it as a general quality, and not a specific design feature of one model.

Not sure what of my statement you find BS - the part about how your statement wasn't about catamarans in general, or the part about it being related to a specific model and your personal reaction to it. Both seem accurate to me. You seem to be offended about something there, but I didn't mean anything offensive, and don't see what that could have been.

As for this being a rah-rah thread, look back and you will see me pointing out what I think are bad qualities and poor designs of catamarans. There are general qualities that exist, like motion, and most of the questions/opinions so far have been around these generalities. There have also been some around specifics, like helm position. Both generalities and specifics are valid topic areas. 

Your response would have been clearer as specific to the Lagoon 380, and not as an answer to the general question of sleep comfort underway - which was the original postulate, and the one you quoted.

Mark


----------



## smj

I remember years ago Chuck Kanter telling me the heads on the French built charter catamarans were big enough to do your business in but not big enough to take care of the paperwork afterwards.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> No. This belief is unfounded, but it is one that is propagated often, and deeply believed by many. However, it is a faith, and not an engineering design.
> 
> I have met many people who believe their rigging is designed to go before the boat tips over. When asked why they believe this, I have yet to hear, or be pointed to, anything that could be considered valid. Most just say that is the way cruising catamarans are designed. Some say that their dealer/broker told them this, and further their conviction by pointing out that their dealer/broker has been in the business for many years. Being a magazine contributor, or having sailed X number of miles, doesn't shield one from this, nor provide knowledge.
> 
> Nobody has ever directed me to actual manufacturer information or engineering data saying this, and I have never found any on my own. I hear it most from brokers and dealers, but when pressed, they only tell me that "everyone knows this", or point out their many years in the business.
> 
> It is quite possible that a rig can fail before the boat capsizes, but this is just by chance, a weak component, or lack of maintenance. Similar to a rig failing on a monohull when rolled - sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't.
> 
> Again, the reasoning comes down to how the rig would be designed to fail this way, and what the risks are. Rigs don't just magically pop off and go away. A dismasting can be a fatal event, and at minimum a potentially very dangerous one. It could be argued that a dismasting has more potential to kill or harm someone than a capsize. It could also result in the boat sinking outright instead of staying afloat inverted. Manufacturers would be on the hook for a purposeful failure design that killed or harmed someone. There would at least be a disclaimer clause somewhere in a contract addressing this.
> 
> In the other direction, capsize can be caused by a combination of wind and waves without undue stress on rigging components. It also is rarely caused by full sails sheeted tight in high winds on the beam (the author's case for failure). In these (more common) potentials for capsize, the rigging doesn't come into play at all.
> 
> But let's say it is engineered this way. Then the question is how and when do you want that failure to occur? Do you want the mast to fall forward and potentially trip the boat over, or backwards and potentially kill the people in the cockpit, or sideways and hole a hull and potentially cause the boat to sink? Should it fail right as a hull begins to lift - where one has ample time to correct the situation and avoid a problem, or should it only fail when one has lost control and the boat is going over anyway? The middle ground between those two points when a rig failure could help is a very short time and would require precise engineering of many, many components working together.
> 
> And this isn't even putting on an engineer's hat (I'm not an engineer). Those that are can probably immediately see the multiple issues with taking many rigging components with broad ranges of working and breaking loads, each that handles different forces in different directions and different ways, and putting them all together in a package that has a precisely defined and implemented "fuse" point. Keeping in mind the normal manufacturing variances of both the rigging components and the boat itself.
> 
> Of course, once the boat and rigging is finally setup this way, one could never change any aspect of the boat - like taking on extra water or provisioning, or adding extra crew members. And then when it became time to re-rig or get new sails, the engineering would have to start all over again.
> 
> I would personally be very happy to discover that this old saw was indeed true and backed up by engineering design and rationale. I know for a fact it isn't the case for our boat, but might be willing to redo the rigging with an engineer if it could be made to fail only at the critical moment and not at any other time.
> 
> But so far logic and reasoning leads me to believe otherwise. Of course, I am very open to changing my mind on this, because finding it true would impact our lives in a favorable way. So if anyone does have different information, or can point me to relevant data, I would be appreciative.
> 
> Mark


Great explanation, Mark. Since that article I had been looking around to see if I could find any reliable info on how they'd pull off such a design and had seen anything. Your explanation makes sense to me.

The problem is - this would be a powerful marketing tool to those who are afraid of capsize...but could actually make things much more dangerous for those people if they are counting on that. So it certainly shouldn't be perpetuated without facts. I'm going to see if I can contact that author and ask where he got his information.


----------



## smackdaddy

aeventyr60 said:


> I'll cry BS on that! This is a discussion on catamarans correct? My reaction? Yes, based on actual experience. I know your more comfy with the cut and paste guys, and heaven forbid if anyone had a less then steller review or experience on any sort of catamaran.
> 
> Particular model? Of course and a very popular one at that. How else could any one evaluate a particular model of any boat with out mentioning how is was equipped? Should me and my gal have just sweated it out in a kleenex box sized cabin? Her feelings and opinions not important?
> 
> Why talk generalities? I think chall and smack have talked about a lot of specific design features. What gives with you? Out of your comfort zone?


Aev - why are you so aggro? I agree with Mark's statement in that you were talking about an experience you had on a single Lagoon 38. And it was this list of observations...

-factory supplied mattresses sucks
-ventilation sucks 
-only one fan and the small opening port 
-herky jerky motion 
-slap slap of water against the hulls
-tiny little cabinets in the head 
-not sure how women visitors would get along in the claustraphobic sized head 
-fat chicks can't use the bathroom

I didn't address this post of yours above because it is your own experience being on a Lagoon 38. And that's valuable.

But, to Mark's point, I see only one item that is truly *multi *related. The rest are things someone might have said about our Hunter too. Or they are things that could easily be modified/improved if it were your own boat. So I dismissed a lot of it too as just personal preference. I thought exactly what Mark thought.

But now you start throwing the typical Posse shade about me being a "cut and paste" guy? And you hint toward the same accusation of being "attacked" if you post something a certain poster disagrees with ("heaven forbid if anyone had a less then steller review or experience on any sort of catamaran")? That's just not right.

You need to understand that the flip side of this accusation is that one should be able to say anything they want, right or wrong, and not be challenged on it. And if they are challenged - it's the challenger, not them that is in the wrong because they are not "allowing criticism" of whatever they are advocating. I don't think that's the way it works. These discussions should be fact-based and reasoned as much as possible. That's the only way they are helpful for readers. And, personally, it's readers I care about most because this is how I learned from forums in the beginning...Googling and finding great, informative threads about the topic I was interested in.

As for me, you guys can call me a cut and paster all you want (it was started by a dude who's no longer here). I have no problem with it. In fact, I take it as a compliment (as you can see in my sig). It means I do my research and present published facts and first-hand expertise. I don't just say stuff and expect people to take it as gospel or I'll get angry. That characteristic seems to be in a few of those who criticize us cut and paste guys.

So, let's just ratchet this stuff down a few notches. Jeff made that rule in his OP.

I personally appreciate your input on the Leopard 38, aev. It always helps to get first-hand accounts. But I also agree with Mark that it's of somewhat limited value in the overall discussion. Nothing wrong with that.

Mark - sorry you seem to be getting pulled into this stuff too.


----------



## smackdaddy

Yet another cat crossing by Youngish Punks...


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> The problem is - this would be a powerful marketing tool to those who are afraid of capsize...


Actually, the problem is that it IS being used as a powerful marketing tool to those who are afraid of capsize!

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

I reached out to Tom via FB. I'll let you know if/how he responds.


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> I remember years ago Chuck Kanter telling me the heads on the French built charter catamarans were big enough to do your business in but not big enough to take care of the paperwork afterwards.


Not just the French charter catamarans. Try out some of the heads on some of the South African charter versions. And they expect one to shower in there also. Maybe that is their overall solution - time your dump and shower to happen together.

But this does bring up another general design characteristic of catamarans - even the largest, fattest ones have narrow hulls relative to monohulls. So there must be different compromises in how things are laid out and their human interfaces (there is probably a proper technical or architectural term for how humans interact best with their fixed surroundings). Cramming 2 heads into each narrow hull just cannot produce good results - unless the berths are put in more compromised positions, or the bridgedeck is invaded.

Charter versions of boats are specifically designed only to be put up with for a week or so. Even the French boats usually have "owners" versions that present better livable layouts for longer term. This is probably also true for charter versions of monohulls to a lesser degree.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Mark - is the term you're looking for "ergonomics" (though that's usually used in relation to work environments, but it's the same idea)?

I put together a quick, proportional side-by-side layout comparison of (from top to bottom) our old Hunter 40, Aev's Tayana 37, and the Leopard 38...










As you say, the width of that v-berth in the T37 is amazing (good job Bob Perry). So I can see how aev would feel cramped in what looks to be a roughly queen-size width bed on the L38.

I don't see a huge difference in head size - but I've never been on either the T37 or the L38. It sure looks like BOTH the L38 heads and beds are bigger overall than on our H40. On the H40, the toilet IS the "shower". So I'm all over the space I see on the L38 in that regard.

Aev, can you explain the ventilation issue a bit more? Which cabin were you guys in? It looks like the T37 has the main v-berth hatch and two side hatches. Doesn't the L38 have mostly the same configuration?


----------



## colemj

He was describing a Lagoon 380, not a Leopard 38.

The problem with ventilation in the aft berths of some catamarans is that the cockpit and cabin is pushed out so that any hatches are behind the cabin bulkhead or in the cockpit. Not much air flows through them. We have chartered a couple like this (don't remember if the 380 was like that), and took to sleeping in the smaller forward cabins just for air flow in the heat.

This is a model-dependent design. 

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> He was describing a Lagoon 380, not a Leopard 38.
> 
> The problem with ventilation in the aft berths of some catamarans is that the cockpit and cabin is pushed out so that any hatches are behind the cabin bulkhead or in the cockpit. Not much air flows through them. We have chartered a couple like this (don't remember if the 380 was like that), and took to sleeping in the smaller forward cabins just for air flow in the heat.
> 
> This is a model-dependent design.
> 
> Mark


Oops - my mistake. Here is that Lagoon 38 layout so readers can compare with those others above...










On the ventilation, browsing through the interior images, it looks much less ventilated than the Leopard as you guys are saying. We had the same issue on our Hunter 40 in the aft cabin. There were two opening hatches on the side-decks, and 4 others that opened into the cockpit. It wasn't great airflow at night, but I've been on a lot of boats in very hot weather on the Gulf coast and have never NOT been hot at night. The only exception is when we were offshore in mellow weather and could totally throw open everything on the boat. Then we'd get some nice breeze. I think that issue depends on an awful lot of factors.


----------



## colemj

The above made me think of another design aspect of catamarans that generally differs from monohulls - the cockpit bulkhead problem.

The big saloon that is so great for just about everything, comes with a stiff price of having a tall rear bulkhead. This is often made as open as possible through the use of windows, hatches, and big sliding doors, but the fact remains that it is inescapable and presents some challenges.

First, the people in the cockpit do not have good views forward. They also have varying degrees of ventilation, from none at all to great - depending on the design. Recent designs have made the hardtop integral to the cabin top by connecting it to the cabin bulkhead, and raised the helm station out of the cockpit. This attempts to solve the helm issue (point #2 below), but it provides no airflow at all into the cockpit. We have had such bad experiences on this type of design sweltering in the heat to the point of becoming ill, that we have taken to refusing cocktail and dinner invites on certain boats (not due to the owners - but the boats). For the life of me, I cannot understand why this design decision is taking over the market.

Not all boats are like this. Ours, for example, has 26" of free space between the hardtop and the cabin bulkhead. Opening the clears gives unobstructed wind flow - so much that we often put down sections of the clears to modify it. We also have a hatch in the hardtop. Many other designs also have similar openings to various extent.

Second, the big cabin bulkhead presents a helm and sail handling issue. Once a bulkhead helm is decided over rear corner or flybridge helms, then one has to raise it enough so the helmsman can see over it, or keep it low and make the helmsman look through the entire cabin to see forward. If raised, the issue becomes providing headroom without having the helmsman poke their head above the top. Then it may result in only a "gun slit" to see out of. If lower on the bulkhead, then the helmsman has to look through the entire boat to see out, and provisions must be made in the design to allow this.

Sail handling controls on both can be difficult to get right. Electric winches help because the winches can be mounted in places that aren't the best for human grinding. Organizers and clutches help too. On some, big winches for halyards and mainsheet are moved into the cockpit for easy handling, but these then take up cockpit space.

Of course, there are other helm positions and sail handling solutions to get around this bulkhead issue - and some boats like the Mainecat do away with the cabin bulkhead altogether - but I just wanted to raise this bulkhead design problem as something generally different and unique to catamarans.

Mark


----------



## chef2sail

smackdaddy said:


> Aev - why are you so aggro? I agree with Mark's statement in that you were talking about an experience you had on a single Lagoon 38. And it was this list of observations...
> 
> -factory supplied mattresses sucks
> -ventilation sucks
> -only one fan and the small opening port
> -herky jerky motion
> -slap slap of water against the hulls
> -tiny little cabinets in the head
> -not sure how women visitors would get along in the claustraphobic sized head
> -fat chicks can't use the bathroom
> 
> I didn't address this post of yours above because it is your own experience being on a Lagoon 38. And that's valuable.
> 
> But, to Mark's point, I see only one item that is truly *multi *related. The rest are things someone might have said about our Hunter too. Or they are things that could easily be modified/improved if it were your own boat. So I dismissed a lot of it too as just personal preference. I thought exactly what Mark thought.
> 
> But now you start throwing the typical Posse shade about me being a "cut and paste" guy? And you hint toward the same accusation of being "attacked" if you post something a certain poster disagrees with ("heaven forbid if anyone had a less then steller review or experience on any sort of catamaran")? That's just not right.
> 
> You need to understand that the flip side of this accusation is that one should be able to say anything they want, right or wrong, and not be challenged on it. And if they are challenged - it's the challenger, not them that is in the wrong because they are not "allowing criticism" of whatever they are advocating. I don't think that's the way it works. These discussions should be fact-based and reasoned as much as possible. That's the only way they are helpful for readers. And, personally, it's readers I care about most because this is how I learned from forums in the beginning...Googling and finding great, informative threads about the topic I was interested in.
> 
> As for me, you guys can call me a cut and paster all you want (it was started by a dude who's no longer here). I have no problem with it. In fact, I take it as a compliment (as you can see in my sig). It means I do my research and present published facts and first-hand expertise. I don't just say stuff and expect people to take it as gospel or I'll get angry. That characteristic seems to be in a few of those who criticize us cut and paste guys.
> 
> So, let's just ratchet this stuff down a few notches. Jeff made that rule in his OP.
> 
> I personally appreciate your input on the Leopard 38, aev. It always helps to get first-hand accounts. But I also agree with Mark that it's of somewhat limited value in the overall discussion. Nothing wrong with that.
> 
> Mark - sorry you seem to be getting pulled into this stuff too.


Interesting how you frame that cut and paste stuff Daddy.....shows you missed the point of the original SN poster S/V Auspicious who decided to not post here anymore.

His credentials BTW were impeccable. Past President of SSCA, career in Electronics, business as a Sailboat delivery captain who sailed a HUGE variety of boats offshore, willing teacher in person and took many on here as crew for experience. Yet you riidiculed and berated him with excessive verbiage every chance you got. Whether it was excessively number of mindless posts or through written insults.

The cut and paste meaning as I took it applied in two differing ways. I am so glad you accepted it as it surely applies. Yes one of its meanings was googling excessively to find snippets and opinions to support your bend or opinion.

More powerfully it also meant you were a cut and paste sailor and lacked the real time experience you boasted with your knowledge. Your experience behind the computer screen is beyond all of us I agree,. If ever I needed someone to reasearch the Internet, you'd be the man. However if I wanted to learn from someone about seamanship ( which we discussed here before) and sailing, someone like Auspicious or Killarney Would certainly be the person whose opinion I would value. Like I said previously Auspicious gave his personal time one on one to help other sailors. It wasn't just verbal cur and paste knowledge it was first hand experience.

To understand sailing it takes more than an illuminated screen or google search. It helps to have a few nautical miles under your belt. That's why if you were so concerned with new posters getting the correct message or hearing the correct facts, why not get them from the experienced hands on sailors.

You purport that you learned by listening, but in fact you are so busy posting your agenda or expertise when would their be room to listen. You are so busy trying to disprove someone posting a contrary view that you excessively minimize their opinions . To that you say they are wrong facts. In actually the are not wrong facts. They are the facts or the opinion that someone with much more experience than you believes in. It isn't necessary necessarily to disprove the other person.

In this thread you have an obvious agenda. By your own words you have sold your monohull, currently have a beach cat, and beleive your next boat will be a multihull of some kind. Course you really know very little about them except what you have read. So since this is the direction you want to go you argue and counterpoint almost everyone opinion to the contrary about multihulls. Amusing as your only real time experience in seamanship is on a monohull. Yet if we counted the posts on this thread it's almost like a monologue from you. It's disingenuous to think you could learn from someone else unless of course you were posting questions, but that's not the case.

You tell others to settle down and lower the rhetoric, but maybe that would happen if you followed your own advice. I keep waiting for you to post your own personal experience instead of those ridiculous young gun copy and paste infomercials. Will that happen? I'm waiting. Personal experience trumps cut and paste Internet finding. We all know the Internet can be faked. Can't do that with personal experiences.

This is what Some of us think the cut and paste stuff is. I can google search on my own, who I really want to hear from are people like CJM who has actual experience. Actual trumps virtual anytime. That's who I learn from.ill bet I am not alone.


----------



## RegisteredUser

The thread subject is great.
The pom-pom waving/circle jerk is something else.
I don't understand the psychology......
There is something missing...so there is the search/reach on the Internet to help validate/insure

If you ever 'think' you 'might' be taking Net forums too seriously, or using them as emotional support.....go take a long walk and get away for a bit.


----------



## smackdaddy

Chef, I fully understand the history. Believe me. It's what I've been saying for a long while now, and I appreciate your confirming it. The only reason I responded to that post of Aev's was because it was just continuing this very, very tired, very, very old game. And I'd really and truly rather focus on boats and sailing...and move beyond that stuff.



chef2sail said:


> I keep waiting for you to post your own personal experience instead of those ridiculous young gun copy and paste infomercials. Will that happen? I'm waiting. Personal experience trumps cut and paste Internet finding. We all know the Internet can be faked. Can't do that with personal experiences.
> 
> This is what Some of us think the cut and paste stuff is. I can google search on my own, who I really want to hear from are people like CJM who has actual experience. Actual trumps virtual anytime. That's who I learn from.ill bet I am not alone.


Here's the deal - if this is a real issue for this particular thread, shouldn't colemj and smj be the ones complaining about it? I can tell you that neither of them has said anything to me as of yet.

What I am doing (my "agenda") is LOTS of research -* specifically stuff that illustrates ACTUAL experience by ACTUAL people* - and I'm posting some of it here. I'm doing this for 2 reasons:

1. It's information for me and readers like me (of whom there are A LOT on this thread) who are interested in knowing what all these boats are doing out there and how the people sailing them feel about them (especially if they have a lot of experience sailing both monos and mutlis). This means that the discussion is not solely opinions and observations from a very small group of SN posters, many of whom don't sail them - but *real* feedback from those who do (be they posting here or not). And this informed feedback through this content either underscores or invalidates various perceptions of these boats, their designs, their capabilities, their safety, and even the market forces behind them.

2. Most importantly, I'm doing this to present what I'm finding *TO very experienced guys like colemj and smj who are posting here on SN*, so they can confirm or discount whatever is claimed. I would wager that they are more experienced on this stuff than virtually anyone else who has posted in this thread. And I want to learn from them. I really do.

If critiques or accolades are provided by someone, regardless of who it is, I want to look into it to know if it's accurate (which is why I reached out to the CW writer about his claim of "fuse shrouds" which colemj is dubious of).

How is any of this a bad thing?

So, I completely agree with you that "Personal experience trumps cut and paste Internet finding". And that's why I am very happy that these guys are here and are willing to discuss all this...with *great* attitudes no less. It's been a hell of a lot of fun thus far. I hope more and more multi sailors will come into this thread and offer their experience as well. I'd even love to see an entire Multi section crop up here on SN so we can go big with this.

So, if either of these guys think my posting these examples is bad form - I have no doubt they'll tell me. I will defer to them.


----------



## RegisteredUser

smackdaddy said:


> .......
> Here's the deal - if this is a real issue for this particular thread, shouldn't colemj and smj be the ones complaining about it? I can tell you that neither of them has said anything to me as of yet.....


You do this...continuously......mentioning others as support and for justification.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> So, if either of these guys think my posting these examples is bad form - I have no doubt they'll tell me. I will defer to them.


I don't look at videos, so most of the time I don't know what is being posted unless a synopsis is also given. The reason is two-fold: I don't have the bandwidth most of the time to load them (this response will take a full minute to post), and I just don't like watching videos. It isn't my type of learning, while it works well for others. Usually, I'm scrubbing through them like crazy trying to find the 20 seconds of important or interesting information. It isn't just the videos posted here, it is the same with technical and "how to" videos - there is just way too much wasted time with words or obvious stuff rather than only the exact heart of the matter. I hate that manufacturers are now going solely to youtube videos for technical support. It is the same with technical manuals with me - I also scrub through those looking for the one or two paragraphs or single graph that I spend hours thinking about.

HOWEVER. I do think that videos are now the "books" of past generations. I don't see any difference between the "young punk" videos and the Pardey or Roth books in this regard. So I don't think it is bad form to post them, although they aren't my cup of tea.

So far, many of them have generated what I think are good questions and discussions. Even the stunts with full sails and stuffing bows in heavy weather. Some of the pictures posted have been new boats for me, and many of those pictures were relevant and helpful in making points. I've even posted a couple to show a point (had an internet connection bonanza for a couple of weeks).

I don't understand the cut and paste moniker, and don't see how anyone could possibly have experience before learning how to gain experience. You should see the stack of books, printouts, and notebooks I threw away from my searching for knowledge in this area. If the internet was as robust back then, I would have drives full of info (and probably even videos).

Mark


----------



## SanderO

Daddy... readers understand that you have fallen in love with the idea of a cat. No problem... and you are in a learning mode to discover things about them. Your approach seems to find vids and post them to this thread... most of which I don't watch...sort of as proof of how wonderful they are... this is kind of a confirmation bias.

There is useful info provided on here from the two prolific cat owners. This is the more valuable info from my perspective... ask about something and get some wisdom from someone who has experience. Vlogs are marketing tools... teasers and so on... perhaps with some useful info... But most seems to be exhibitionistic pieces about their sailing experiences through the tropics. But sure one can see various boats from the blogs.... probably more accessible that getting up close at a dealer if that is even possible locally. I don't think there are cats to get up close and personal with up here in southern NY... including ones in brokerage. FL is apparently very different.

Many aspects of the sailing experience are emotional and not technical. Sleeping underway with some heel on and not pounding is a very lovely feel. Can't beat it. Things like this.

You're not going to buy a boat based on a vlog and hopefully you'll sail with several before knowing which one is right for you.


----------



## outbound

As regards heads it’s important to divid cats the same way you would divide monos. Look at the Razor my friend Josh is developing to be in production at PSC. Boat is 50’. It has two doubles aft where the noise and motion is much less. There are two passage berths amidships but other than the one head in each hull nothing forward of the mast. There are separate shower stalls and plenty of room around the thrones by placing them there. 
Just like with monos designed to function as open ocean passagemakers this cat is designed solely as a Passagemaker/two couple liveaboard with room for six if needed for passage but able to make passages with single person watches which is the way most mom and pops travel. The comment about boats designed with 4 twin berths as pictured and mentioned above have another purpose in mind when drawn. Just like that forward queen which is rarely used on passage in a mono forward berths in a cat aren’t as nice as berths aft of the mast.
We live in the forward stateroom on our mono when coastal but sleep aft of the mast when in transit. Isn’t it nice to have two full staterooms aft in a cat and have the unnecessary forward staterooms removed and put to better purposes.


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> So far, many of them have generated what I think are good questions and discussions.


THAT is my goal here.


----------



## outbound

Don’t watch any of them. Do listen to people who have experience with them and compare that to my limited experience and what I’ve been taught. As said quite some time ago be a lot more helpful to critique particular boats and design elements.
Smackie seems to want to out Paulo Paulo. Not possible as Paulo did educate you and justified his opinions.


----------



## aeventyr60

smackdaddy said:


> Aev - why are you so aggro? I agree with Mark's statement in that you were talking about an experience you had on a single Lagoon 38. And it was this list of observations...
> 
> -factory supplied mattresses sucks
> -ventilation sucks
> -only one fan and the small opening port
> -herky jerky motion
> -slap slap of water against the hulls
> -tiny little cabinets in the head
> -not sure how women visitors would get along in the claustraphobic sized head
> -fat chicks can't use the bathroom
> 
> I didn't address this post of yours above because it is your own experience being on a Lagoon 38. And that's valuable.
> 
> But, to Mark's point, I see only one item that is truly *multi *related. The rest are things someone might have said about our Hunter too. Or they are things that could easily be modified/improved if it were your own boat. So I dismissed a lot of it too as just personal preference. I thought exactly what Mark thought.
> 
> But now you start throwing the typical Posse shade about me being a "cut and paste" guy? And you hint toward the same accusation of being "attacked" if you post something a certain poster disagrees with ("heaven forbid if anyone had a less then steller review or experience on any sort of catamaran")? That's just not right.
> 
> You need to understand that the flip side of this accusation is that one should be able to say anything they want, right or wrong, and not be challenged on it. And if they are challenged - it's the challenger, not them that is in the wrong because they are not "allowing criticism" of whatever they are advocating. I don't think that's the way it works. These discussions should be fact-based and reasoned as much as possible. That's the only way they are helpful for readers. And, personally, it's readers I care about most because this is how I learned from forums in the beginning...Googling and finding great, informative threads about the topic I was interested in.
> 
> As for me, you guys can call me a cut and paster all you want (it was started by a dude who's no longer here). I have no problem with it. In fact, I take it as a compliment (as you can see in my sig). It means I do my research and present published facts and first-hand expertise. I don't just say stuff and expect people to take it as gospel or I'll get angry. That characteristic seems to be in a few of those who criticize us cut and paste guys.
> 
> So, let's just ratchet this stuff down a few notches. Jeff made that rule in his OP.
> 
> I personally appreciate your input on the Leopard 38, aev. It always helps to get first-hand accounts. But I also agree with Mark that it's of somewhat limited value in the overall discussion. Nothing wrong with that.
> 
> Mark - sorry you seem to be getting pulled into this stuff too.


Not aggro at all, but if the discussion can't contain "actual" experience then what good is it? You and others are expressing a desire to eventually purchase and sail away on a cat. Sure your independent research and "cut and pasting" is one way to go about things..My way is to actually be on boats. You can take my comments anyway way you want..here is a few more observations from "actually" being on the cat..and has a direct bearing on the livability of doing so.

3 burner stove with a extremely small oven, you won't be roasting a chicken in this thing nor baking bread.

Bar style fridge, front opening. Hopelessly insulated..Good internal plates with the industry standard Danfoss BD 50 compressor. Probably looking at well over 125 amps per day to run this.

Ventilation in the entire boat is an Issue, no flow thru. 2 small opening windows in the front salon.Small opening ports in all cabins. Larger opening ports (deck) in forward staterooms. One fan in each stateroom. Suggest at least two and maybe up to four fans. Need to be able to exhaust the hot air is the key here.

Think cockpit fans are need as well. The "great white wall" really blocks the breeze from the dining table here. Other cruising cats I've been on have several fans..

Comfort stuff- There is no place other then the cabins to fully stretch out and lay down. The "U" shaped dinette table does not go down. The outside bench seats are too narrow. I guess if you like laying in a hammock you might be ok.

Sail controls- Liked the continuos sheet on the mainsheet travveler, except had to get off the helm to adjust. Double lines on mainsheet so could adjust from helm. Standard double line sheeting on the headsail..still need to get off helm, cross over and adjust on opposite side. Too much friction on most of the control lines, think the factory could have done a better job on alignment here. Larger sheeves and rope clutches would be better as well. Raising the main from the cockpit another futile exercise. Works better to pull it up from the mast, then have it tailed back. Lazy jack system was installed a bit narrow on the mast, extremely small gap to raise that roachy full battened main. Easing the lazy jacks really did not help in breezy conditions.

I think the lagoon 38 is quite a piggy boat to sail. Heavy. Was not impressed with the performance with the 20 drunken Swedes we had on board. I figured that load (3000 lbs.) was probably pretty close to what one would have with a full offshore cruising load..

During the same time frame was also sailing the Prout 38, English made version..much better sailing here.

I'd go on but time for a swim..


----------



## smackdaddy

Thanks aev. That is good feedback.

My plan is to pack a bit lighter on the Drunken Swedes, so that should help. I mean, if a _chicken_ won't fit in that oven...


----------



## colemj

aeventyr60 said:


> 3 burner stove with a extremely small oven, you won't be roasting a chicken in this thing nor baking bread.
> 
> Bar style fridge, front opening. Hopelessly insulated..Good internal plates with the industry standard Danfoss BD 50 compressor. Probably looking at well over 125 amps per day to run this.
> 
> Ventilation in the entire boat is an Issue, no flow thru. 2 small opening windows in the front salon.Small opening ports in all cabins. Larger opening ports (deck) in forward staterooms. One fan in each stateroom. Suggest at least two and maybe up to four fans. Need to be able to exhaust the hot air is the key here.
> 
> Think cockpit fans are need as well. The "great white wall" really blocks the breeze from the dining table here. Other cruising cats I've been on have several fans..
> 
> Comfort stuff- There is no place other then the cabins to fully stretch out and lay down. The "U" shaped dinette table does not go down. The outside bench seats are too narrow. I guess if you like laying in a hammock you might be ok.
> 
> Sail controls- Liked the continuos sheet on the mainsheet travveler, except had to get off the helm to adjust. Double lines on mainsheet so could adjust from helm. Standard double line sheeting on the headsail..still need to get off helm, cross over and adjust on opposite side. Too much friction on most of the control lines, think the factory could have done a better job on alignment here. Larger sheeves and rope clutches would be better as well. Raising the main from the cockpit another futile exercise. Works better to pull it up from the mast, then have it tailed back. Lazy jack system was installed a bit narrow on the mast, extremely small gap to raise that roachy full battened main. Easing the lazy jacks really did not help in breezy conditions.
> 
> I think the lagoon 38 is quite a piggy boat to sail. Heavy. Was not impressed with the performance with the 20 drunken Swedes we had on board. I figured that load (3000 lbs.) was probably pretty close to what one would have with a full offshore cruising load..


We have spent a couple of weeks chartering a L380, and the above is an apt description of how we found that model boat. It was a new boat, minus the drunken Swedes, but in light ship displacement.

Many of the issues could be mitigated by an owner, but some cannot.

On the plus side, so many of these boats were made and put into charter that the used market is flooded with them. Modestly aged ones in decent condition can be picked up for $125-150k. Structurally, the ones I've looked at seem to be well-built in general.

Mark


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

chef2sail said:


> Interesting how you frame that cut and paste stuff Daddy.....shows you missed the point of the original SN poster S/V Auspicious who decided to not post here anymore.
> 
> His credentials BTW were impeccable. Past President of SSCA, career in Electronics, business as a Sailboat delivery captain who sailed a HUGE variety of boats offshore, willing teacher in person and took many on here as crew for experience. Yet you riidiculed and berated him with excessive verbiage every chance you got. Whether it was excessively number of mindless posts or through written insults.
> 
> The cut and paste meaning as I took it applied in two differing ways. I am so glad you accepted it as it surely applies. Yes one of its meanings was googling excessively to find snippets and opinions to support your bend or opinion.
> 
> More powerfully it also meant you were a cut and paste sailor and lacked the real time experience you boasted with your knowledge. Your experience behind the computer screen is beyond all of us I agree,. If ever I needed someone to reasearch the Internet, you'd be the man. However if I wanted to learn from someone about seamanship ( which we discussed here before) and sailing, someone like Auspicious or Killarney Would certainly be the person whose opinion I would value. Like I said previously Auspicious gave his personal time one on one to help other sailors. It wasn't just verbal cur and paste knowledge it was first hand experience.
> 
> To understand sailing it takes more than an illuminated screen or google search. It helps to have a few nautical miles under your belt. That's why if you were so concerned with new posters getting the correct message or hearing the correct facts, why not get them from the experienced hands on sailors.
> 
> You purport that you learned by listening, but in fact you are so busy posting your agenda or expertise when would their be room to listen. You are so busy trying to disprove someone posting a contrary view that you excessively minimize their opinions . To that you say they are wrong facts. In actually the are not wrong facts. They are the facts or the opinion that someone with much more experience than you believes in. It isn't necessary necessarily to disprove the other person.
> 
> In this thread you have an obvious agenda. By your own words you have sold your monohull, currently have a beach cat, and beleive your next boat will be a multihull of some kind. Course you really know very little about them except what you have read. So since this is the direction you want to go you argue and counterpoint almost everyone opinion to the contrary about multihulls. Amusing as your only real time experience in seamanship is on a monohull. Yet if we counted the posts on this thread it's almost like a monologue from you. It's disingenuous to think you could learn from someone else unless of course you were posting questions, but that's not the case.
> 
> You tell others to settle down and lower the rhetoric, but maybe that would happen if you followed your own advice. I keep waiting for you to post your own personal experience instead of those ridiculous young gun copy and paste infomercials. Will that happen? I'm waiting. Personal experience trumps cut and paste Internet finding. We all know the Internet can be faked. Can't do that with personal experiences.
> 
> This is what Some of us think the cut and paste stuff is. I can google search on my own, who I really want to hear from are people like CJM who has actual experience. Actual trumps virtual anytime. That's who I learn from.ill bet I am not alone.


I did not realize Smackdaddy was allowed to run off Auspicious. And we got Smackdaddy back.

GREAT job, Sailnet moderators! (I suppose that means Jeff_H for whom I otherwise have enormous respect).

The good thing is that I will waste a lot less time from now on here.


----------



## outbound

Was entering anegada and forced nearly out of the channel by a 50’+ cat. Told captain I was draft restricted but he continued to power on through. He dropped a water toy and yelled at me to pick it up for him. 
I anchored in ~20’ of water with 120’ of chain as the trades were well established behind the sand spit to the right of the channel. He anchored just off the lobster restaurant on little scope. We called up to order our lobsters on the vhf for us and a buddy boat on a 56’ Hylas and he sat on our transmission. 
Had a lovely dinner and went back to our boats. Friend made a bet with me as to how long it would take for the obnoxious charter cat to end up on the rock ledge just to the left of the restaurant. He said before we go to sleep. I said by the morning as there was only 2-4’ rollers in the harbor. 
In the very early AM was woken to screams and horns. He ended up on that rock ledge. Another cruiser was in his dinghy asking him to pass an anchor off his stern to prevent him from driving further up the ledge. He refused. We jumped in our dinghy to help but he was just yelling at everybody refusing help so all the cruisers just backed off. 
We went to the beach at the eastern end of the island. Upon returning the chapter company had set up huge airbags between the hulls and slid him off.
A few weeks later we went into Spanish town and saw that hull on the hard. Both hulls were destroyed as the keels were driven up through them. I got to see the thickness and nature of the layup. It was as thick as a sheet of cardboard. Just a few layers of mat and woven. My dinghy has a more substantial layup. So respectfully disagree. Wouldn’t take an ex charter cat out cruising. Maybe one of the better South African boats but few of the French ones.


----------



## aeventyr60

I think the French did a pretty good job on most aspects of the Lagoons. I think one would really have to define their intended cruising grounds, how they will use the boat, and expected performance criteria. I also did a delivery on a Lagoon 440 from Borneo to Phuket a number of years back. Some of the same issues on that one too. I don't think it's a bad boat to hang about and cruise local waters..


----------



## SanderO

chef's analysis of the thread seems accurate. Now I learn that Auspicious has been canned... what for?

I recall another knowledgeable sailor... whose nick I don't recall who was like a PR machine for the new monos coming onto the market and posted a lot of copy paste content. I found this somewhat interesting only because I am not in the market for a new boat and it becomes an intellectual exercise to understand and discuss the merits of new design solutions and the "problems" they address. So in the case the copy and paste provided a means for readers to see these "solutions" and discuss their features and attributes.

I suppose the same may apply to cats. But it gets a bit more complicated. There are sailing "features" with are consideration for all boats and there are some which apply to monos and others to cats. Something like aesthetics are of course subjective and so anyone with an OPINION is welcome to chime in. There are no right opinions only some may be better expressed and informed.

The discussion would be vastly better if it focused on specific attributes which are different in cats and monos... and if there was something other than an subjective means to compare them. So unless these vlog pastes really show the attribute under discussion... they are just spamming the thread with PR content.

Now 45 pages of comments it appears that target "use" for cats is for long term cruising in tropical climates... term charter in the same regions. The discussion needs to (I think) revolve around this type of sailing... and the charter use is not really relevant to the OP.

Some of the attributes to discuss may be as it applies to long term cruising:

stowage
motoring range
ventilation
berths 
visibility for watch keeping
sea motion
steering issues
anchoring
storm tactics
points of sail performance
purchase cost
maintenance cost

and so on


----------



## smj

outbound said:


> Was entering anegada and forced nearly out of the channel by a 50'+ cat. Told captain I was draft restricted but he continued to power on through. He dropped a water toy and yelled at me to pick it up for him.
> I anchored in ~20' of water with 120' of chain as the trades were well established behind the sand spit to the right of the channel. He anchored just off the lobster restaurant on little scope. We called up to order our lobsters on the vhf for us and a buddy boat on a 56' Hylas and he sat on our transmission.
> Had a lovely dinner and went back to our boats. Friend made a bet with me as to how long it would take for the obnoxious charter cat to end up on the rock ledge just to the left of the restaurant. He said before we go to sleep. I said by the morning as there was only 2-4' rollers in the harbor.
> In the very early AM was woken to screams and horns. He ended up on that rock ledge. Another cruiser was in his dinghy asking him to pass an anchor off his stern to prevent him from driving further up the ledge. He refused. We jumped in our dinghy to help but he was just yelling at everybody refusing help so all the cruisers just backed off.
> We went to the beach at the eastern end of the island. Upon returning the chapter company had set up huge airbags between the hulls and slid him off.
> A few weeks later we went into Spanish town and saw that hull on the hard. Both hulls were destroyed as the keels were driven up through them. I got to see the thickness and nature of the layup. It was as thick as a sheet of cardboard. Just a few layers of mat and woven. My dinghy has a more substantial layup. So respectfully disagree. Wouldn't take an ex charter cat out cruising. Maybe one of the better South African boats but few of the French ones.


I'm guessing the mass produced catamarans are built like the majority of mass produced monohulls, to a price point. I've got a friend who owns a Lagoon, he's says when sailing in a light chop he can watch the hull below the waterline around the seacocks flex. I've also seen a new Island Packet monohull hauled out after it ran into something and holed the hull below the shower pan. There was no access to the hull below the shower pan so no way to slow the water from the inside, bad design. And the glass was less than a 1/4" thick, far from the bulletproof construction reputation that I thought IP had.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

SanderO said:


> chef's analysis of the thread seems accurate. Now I learn that Auspicious has been canned... what for?


The way I remember it, Auspicious (and some of the others here) lobbied long and hard to get Smackdaddy banned - going to the point of throwing hissy fits, baiting him, and generally just acting like 6yr olds.

When Smackdaddy was banned for whatever reason, there were several days of rejoicing, patting each other on the backs, and general smugness.

When his ban was lifted for whatever reason, Auspicious threw a tantrum and left the forums - he was not canned. He has actually signed in and even posted a few times since.

I found the entire episode repugnant and disgraceful. Many of the people here have a lot to be ashamed of. Many here still act like 6yr olds, or like this place is their personal playground.

If one doesn't like a poster, or the content they post, then don't bother with the thread. I don't go to threads that I don't like, or don't interest me, and don't respond to what I think are intentional provocations - and don't have any difficulties doing so. It really isn't that hard.

FWIW, I also argued certain technical points with Auspicious, and when facts and figures backed him into a corner, he lashed out. He was given too much of a free ride by some of you, and seemed to demand that he not be questioned. The experience really surprised me because in other interactions he has been calm, gracious, and thoughtful. We are still waiting for his report on the wireless Furuno radar, and for him to get back with us on his research into current antenna splitters.

Mark


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> Was entering anegada and forced nearly out of the channel by a 50'+ cat. Told captain I was draft restricted but he continued to power on through. He dropped a water toy and yelled at me to pick it up for him.
> I anchored in ~20' of water with 120' of chain as the trades were well established behind the sand spit to the right of the channel. He anchored just off the lobster restaurant on little scope. We called up to order our lobsters on the vhf for us and a buddy boat on a 56' Hylas and he sat on our transmission.
> Had a lovely dinner and went back to our boats. Friend made a bet with me as to how long it would take for the obnoxious charter cat to end up on the rock ledge just to the left of the restaurant. He said before we go to sleep. I said by the morning as there was only 2-4' rollers in the harbor.
> In the very early AM was woken to screams and horns. He ended up on that rock ledge. Another cruiser was in his dinghy asking him to pass an anchor off his stern to prevent him from driving further up the ledge. He refused. We jumped in our dinghy to help but he was just yelling at everybody refusing help so all the cruisers just backed off.
> We went to the beach at the eastern end of the island. Upon returning the chapter company had set up huge airbags between the hulls and slid him off.
> A few weeks later we went into Spanish town and saw that hull on the hard. Both hulls were destroyed as the keels were driven up through them. I got to see the thickness and nature of the layup. It was as thick as a sheet of cardboard. Just a few layers of mat and woven. My dinghy has a more substantial layup. So respectfully disagree. Wouldn't take an ex charter cat out cruising. Maybe one of the better South African boats but few of the French ones.


I don't see the relevance for any of this post other than perhaps the last paragraph - which is disassociated with the rest of the post, other than being about the same boat.

As for hull thickness, that is a red herring. First, you assumed the charter model catamaran was destroyed where a non-charter model or a monohull would not have been. Then, you projected the assumption on all French charter boats, while inexplicably associating South African charter models with thicker hulls. Lastly, you seem to associate light layup with bad build.

Having spent many, many hours with catamaran construction across many brands and models, most of your assumptions are unfounded. In general, you will not find heavy layup schedules or scantlings on catamarans because this is bad engineering. Thickness does not equal strength, and boats generally are not build to withstand 12hrs of slamming on a rock ledge - regardless of type.

You would be surprised at the layup schedule on a Chris White, Schionning, LeRouge, etc. In fact, I bet there isn't a catamaran out there whose layup wouldn't surprise you. FWIW, our non-charter catamaran has a double layer of 24oz stitched biax on the outside of a 3/8" honeycomb core and a single layer on the inside. The entire hull is ~1/2" thick. Below the waterline, the hull ranges from 1/4"-3/8" solid glass. This is actually good catamaran engineering of scantlings - actually, probably quite heavy.

It is possible that this particular model you saw does have a poor and insufficient layup. I don't see how that could possibly damn all charter models, or all French models.

Pretty much all of the major brands of catamarans have charter model versions, and there is no difference in layup schedules or scantlings between charter and owner versions. Most of these catamarans are French built. Some are lighter builds and some are heavier builds, but very few of them (if any) are dangerous to cruise with.

Unless your type of cruising involves regularly pounding on rock ledges and the like. Bumping coral heads or soft groundings would be a non-issue because of the keel (and many of those are sacrificial).

Mark


----------



## colemj

Again, I don't watch the videos, but can't understand why a link to them bothers people. As for their content, I can only assume that even the banal ones are showing catamarans under sail, in various conditions, with people doing normal stuff on them and how they are effected in various ways. Even if they are only showing catamarans at anchor with bikinied girls on them, that seems like it provides data as to the platform at anchor (and how chicks dig them, of course).

Paulo's (sp?) posting of pictures and videos did more than anyone to completely change the way I view monohulls, and gave me a good sense of what current design and build directions were taking them. Both good and bad.

I fail to see how the same types of postings here aren't doing the same purpose. One doesn't have to agree with any conclusions (and I didn't with some of Paulo's), but they do provide information content.

And nobody is forced to view them, or even the post containing them.

Mark


----------



## smj

Whether they’re educational or not I enjoy the videos. Real people doing real things having fun and occasionally making real mistakes, that must be the educational part.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> I don't see the relevance for any of this post other than perhaps the last paragraph - which is disassociated with the rest of the post, other than being about the same boat.
> 
> As for hull thickness, that is a red herring. First, you assumed the charter model catamaran was destroyed where a non-charter model or a monohull would not have been. Then, you projected the assumption on all French charter boats, while inexplicably associating South African charter models with thicker hulls. Lastly, you seem to associate light layup with bad build.
> 
> Having spent many, many hours with catamaran construction across many brands and models, most of your assumptions are unfounded. In general, you will not find heavy layup schedules or scantlings on catamarans because this is bad engineering. Thickness does not equal strength, and boats generally are not build to withstand 12hrs of slamming on a rock ledge - regardless of type.
> 
> You would be surprised at the layup schedule on a Chris White, Schionning, LeRouge, etc. In fact, I bet there isn't a catamaran out there whose layup wouldn't surprise you. FWIW, our non-charter catamaran has a double layer of 24oz stitched biax on the outside of a 3/8" honeycomb core and a single layer on the inside. The entire hull is ~1/2" thick. Below the waterline, the hull ranges from 1/4"-3/8" solid glass. This is actually good catamaran engineering of scantlings.
> 
> It is possible that this particular model you saw does have a poor and insufficient layup. I don't see how that could possibly damn all charter models, or all French models.
> 
> Pretty much all of the major brands of catamarans have charter model versions, and there is no difference in layup schedules or scantlings between charter and owner versions. Most of these catamarans are French built. Some are lighter builds and some are heavier builds, but very few of them (if any) are dangerous to cruise with.
> 
> Unless your type of cruising involves regularly pounding on rock ledges and the like. Bumping coral heads or soft groundings would be a non-issue because of the keel (and many of those are sacrificial).
> 
> Mark


And to think Eric LeRouge didn't like the Manta or our old Solaris as he considered them heavy and way overbuilt!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> And to think Eric LeRouge didn't like the Manta or our old Solaris as he considered them heavy and way overbuilt!


They are heavy and overbuilt - ours lightship from the factory is twice the displacement from his design - but I think the real reason he didn't like them is because neither company paid him to use his design.

Him and Bob Perry are probably in quite a large club in this regards.

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> They are heavy and overbuilt - ours lightship from the factory is twice the displacement from his design - but I think the real reason he didn't like them is because neither company paid him to use his design.
> 
> Him and Bob Perry are probably in quite a large club in this regards.
> 
> Mark


You're probably right, he wanted neither to be considered his design.
I noticed his website is no longer available.


----------



## outbound

We’ve have opportunity to see how the Schonning designed Razor is going to be put together. Much like metal construction except the panels are cf/foam. A large panel has the various smaller panels laid out on it to minimize waste then those are cut out to extremely tight tolerances. They are joined together creating the 3D form without need for a mold. Where required amarid reinforcements applied. The nature of construction is phenomenally strong but ridiculously light. This is an entirely different beast then the molded construction employed in series production grp molded mono or multi construction.
I had opportunity to be involved a start up building Peter Ibold designed pilot house cutters in Wareham. I was taught some about manufacture, scantlings, and tooling of grp boats. I do know enough to see a few layers of mat and woven in that type of construction is inadequate. Please back off. I have no desire to argue with you but your assumptions are incorrect. I admit to being a dillante but with a broad base of incomplete knowledge coming from many decades involved in boats at all levels.


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> As for hull thickness, that is a red herring. First, you assumed the charter model catamaran was destroyed where a non-charter model or a monohull would not have been. Then, you projected the assumption on all French charter boats, while inexplicably associating South African charter models with thicker hulls. Lastly, you seem to associate light layup with bad build.
> 
> Having spent many, many hours with catamaran construction across many brands and models, most of your assumptions are unfounded. In general, you will not find heavy layup schedules or scantlings on catamarans because this is bad engineering. Thickness does not equal strength, and boats generally are not build to withstand 12hrs of slamming on a rock ledge - regardless of type.


I think the issue of many non-multi owners evaluating multis is that their "matrix" of good and bad is based on things that are almost antithetical to the very design intent of multis. This hull thickness thing has been debated for eons in just the world of older vs. newer monos with heavier always being better to most. But for the same eons, it has been stated over and over that weight is one of the biggest concerns with multis.

For me, after having been in the middle of that "blue water boat" debate for so many years, it is absolutely refreshing to be able to talk about ocean-crossing multis with none of that baggage.

So, while I totally agree that it would be interesting to get into the comparative details of multis and what makes them better or worse than other multis - I don't think it's helpful if you come at this with a traditional mindest of what makes a "seaworthy" boat. It just doesn't work.

Along those lines I do have a question on something I saw in the videos. In that crossing video with the BubblyLadyInNeedOfAdderall they had some very serious issues with their rigging and mast (new shrouds had WAY to much play and almost parted, mast base broke in some way, etc.). The boat was a Soubise Freydis 46 - and had the swiveling mast. I was wondering if these are still used on multis or if they are now fixed masts. The swiveling mast just doesn't make sense to me on a cruising boat. But I don't know how critical it is to the performance of a multi specifically (though i understand the basics as regards my beachcat).

And I'm wondering if it was that constant multi-directional motion that could have cause some of their rigging woes. Then again, that could be a left-over of my mono thinking like I said above.

Thoughts?

PS - I really miss Paulo. I too learned a TON from his postings - precisely because he included photos and videos and articles that reinforced his points.


----------



## TakeFive

I think that some of you are mischaracterizing SVAuspicious. He is extremely helpful and caring, and has many clients who just love him and the services he provides. He also does a lot to offer free assistance to the overall sailing community. Sailnet used to be part of that, and we here are much less well off without him participating. He is an industry professional with excellent and growing reputation. He was trained at USNA as a naval architect, which gives him an excellent background upon which he has built a lot of other expertise in marine electronics and other areas.

On some topics he seems to be willing to back off and say "it's my opinion against yours," but there are certain other topics which he considers matters of life and death safety. In those narrow areas, he would be very sensitive to inexperienced people posting misinformation that was derived from questionable internet sources. He would be very concerned that some readers here could lose their lives by following dangerous advice, so he would not back down on those topics.

My take on this: When a professional who is paid for his advice donates his time here for free and is faced with constant push-back from others who seem to have infinite time to rebut everything he says with more internet misinformation, he eventually reaches the "not worth my time" conclusion. From a pure professional liability standpoint, he is backed into a corner where by participating and letting someone's uninformed push-back go unanswered, he may "own" the safety issues that can ensue. So the only option is to stop participating completely and focus on other areas where people want his advice. I think this applies to other industry professionals who have left or dramatically reduced their participation on Sailnet. If you want their help for free, you owe it to them to give them a little deference in their specific areas of expertise. If you want to treat them like any other stooge who comes here, they'll go elsewhere where their advice offers more value.

I do not speak for SVAuspicious. These comments are just my own observation and expansion on the few things that he told me about his time on Sailnet. Calling it a "hissy fit" is a mischaracterization, and gives yourself too much credit.


----------



## smackdaddy

This is a great video that walks through differences in cats and monos in terms of how they sail, etc.

How to choose a catamaran - Catamaran sailing techniques - Yachting World

Note: I won't embed the videos anymore. I suddenly recalled how long it took to load the pages of Paulo's "Interesting Boats" thread because of all those videos...and while I loved them, it did become a bit overwhelming. So, from now on, I'll just post the links for those who are interested. Hopefully that will also cut down on some of the complaining.


----------



## SanderO

hmmmm The tenor of the discussions is often at adolescent level with egos on display. This was the opening to one of daddy's threads:

"Okay - this thread is for people that ACTUALLY LIKE Big Freakin' Sails (note for morons: the verb, not the noun). BFS simply means sailing that pushes limits - whatever those limits may be. And herein lies the rub...and the reason I need to explain a couple of things so people don't start foaming at the mouth right off the bat."

I am not sure whether I read the posts... and I am not sure I accept the premise of pushing limits... which seems to be inherently dangerous. I think there is a more mature way to discuss things such as what are the safe limits for boats in challenging conditions.

That thread idea as stated struck me as odd and was more about being a dare devil for an adrenaline rush as something sailors old and new aspire to. I think there is plenty of thrill in sailing in difficult conditions... and certainly there would be fear. 

But overall the level of decorum leaves a lot to be desired at times.

I suppose people have different reasons for participation on SN. Maybe shoot the breeze with other sailors... compare notes on experiences... and exchange information... a platform for learning... all are fine... as long as the level of the discussion is adult.


----------



## smackdaddy

Sander, for crying out loud, this thread is about multis. If you guys want to keep going at me, *please* take it to another thread where you guys can slag me all you want. I don't care. Just quit repeatedly lugging it in here. It's getting very, very old. You'll notice I rarely post in any thread but this one now, unless I feel I can help someone. But that's no reason for you guys to keep coming at me *here* when you can easily do it elsewhere. Why keep polluting this thread?

I would ask you to think about your answer to that question in relation to the "level of decorum" you're demanding of *me* in your own post.

I will say that you need to understand the history to understand the context of that BFS post/thread of mine. So I'll quickly address it, then I'm done talking about all this ridiculous stuff in this thread. I want to talk about multis. Period.

I joined Sailnet when I very first started sailing in 2008. I found, via Google as you'd imagine, the best sailing thread I've ever come across on any sailing forum out there: "FightClub For Sailors". You would have absolutely *hated* it. Trust me. It was about pushing yourself and your boat to limits, and coming through big, harrowing, dangerous sails successfully - as well as drinking and general joking and bragging and a furious battle of wits. But this was back when the Sailnet membership as a whole was FAR less tender and angsty about things. I believe you referred to us as "Frat Boys" when we came over to Stuff. And if by "frat" you mean Animal House - you were absolutely right...










"FightClub For Sailors" got out of hand after a while - as you'd imagine it would - and I was asked to start my own thread about big sailing stories if that's what I really wanted to talk about, instead of continuing to try to do it in FCFS where there was still a lot of hatred for THAT thread's original poster: Surfesq.

So, it was in that spirit that I posted that first post in the BFS thread - which is now *the* most viewed non-sticky thread (and second most-viewed all-time thread) in the General Discussion forum here on SN. That post is in jest, Sander - a continuation of what had been going on in FCFS. Sailors around here used to be able to take a joke and give it back - it was like a fun, raucous, pub. Maybe it's just not that anymore. I don't know.

You'll find that many of my threads are among *the* most viewed in most of the various sections here on SN, and on virtually any other forum I post on. So I absolutely bring value to a forum - it's just a very different flavor than what you're trying to impose here - and what you tried to impose over on Stuff. That said, I do tend to get banned here and there - so I FULLY understand there is a line. I try hard to respect it - but I do stay close to it, just because of my style of posting and joking around and being very forthright about things.

I just think a lot of it has to do with the open-mindedness, camaraderie, honor, and humor level of a forum. So, is there a "more mature way to discuss things"? That depends on how you define "mature". I think joking around and being raucous is far more mature than continually ganging-up on and sniping at people. But I might be in a minority.

Now - you guys take this stuff somewhere else and let us talk about multis. Please.


----------



## outbound

Bye. Another thread ruin by SD.

May come back time to time to see if people stop playing a zero sum game.


----------



## TakeFive

smackdaddy said:


> ...So I'll quickly address it, then I'm done talking about all this ridiculous stuff in this thread...


I like your suggestion. Just like you, we all get one final post on this off-topic stuff, and then move on.

Here's mine. In the interest of moving on quickly, it will be a lot shorter than yours:



smackdaddy said:


> You'll find that many of my threads are among *the* most viewed in most of the various sections here on SN, and on virtually any other forum I post on. So I absolutely bring value to a forum - it's just a very different flavor...


I don't equate number of views with adding value. In fact, if the views come from watching a metaphorical trainwreck unfold or from the internet equivalent of joining a barroom brawl, they subtract significant value. I think that some here intentionally post in an unnecessarily provocative "flavor" with the intent of increasing views so that they can brag about having the "most popular thread evar!"

Thank you for agreeing to not post on this any more in this thread. I think that if we all get our one last post on this (like you did), this thread will be able to move on.

On the other hand, if you insist on responding to this...


----------



## smackdaddy

I'm going to try once more to get things back on track...

Mark and smj - apart from clearance, is there a bridgedeck configuration (on the underside) that mitigates the "slamming" issue I saw in that video of the Soubise Freydis?

smj posted an image of a Lagoon above that has a "V" on the underside...










...and you see other new boats with other approaches to this like the Leopard 40 "flat swoop"...










And the FP Lucia 40 with a similar swoop, but slightly thinner cross-section it appears as well as more fillet at the hull...










Then there is a more angular shape on the Outremer 45 with even more fillet it appears...










I'm picking up that "slamming" is just part of the gig due to how the waves interact with the hulls. I'm just interested in how these companies are trying to deal with it in their designs.


----------



## SanderO

I don't concur that the forum is or should be like raucous barroom full of humor. I don't try to impose anything on anyone. I will express my views on a topic and as a member it my right to do so. I do not make ad hom attacks so why are you writing this post which characterized the tone of your threads. Discussions should not be gotcha fests... but the exchange of information.

However if this forum is to be drowning in your type threads my sense is that the forum will not thrive.

Discussing and comparing cats and monos is a good topic. You don't have to be a cat owner to participate and learn.


----------



## smj

From my experience the bridgedeck configuration on the Manta or our old Solaris Sunstar seems to reduce the power of the slam. With the continual radius there is no flat spot for the wave to hit, the wave seem's to hit the radius then get deflected by the radius and it reduces the power of the wave.








The Freydis in the video also has a radius bridgedeck but may have been overloaded which means the cat was probably traveling through the waves rather than over. It also appears to have a flat spot in the center.








Our cat has a flat bridgedeck but has good clearance and the boat is really light, so she rides over the waves rather than through. This means we have hardly any pounding but probably quite a bit more motion than the heavier cat.









Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

I don't think that is a flat spot on the Freydis bridgedeck - it is a bump out in the rear on each side where the berths are that is faired into the bridgedeck in the front. I think it is just in the shadows and makes it look like a continuous bridgedeck with a flat spot.

I haven't seen the video, so can't comment much on the slamming or rigging. The Freydis bridgedeck is generally considered a good design and is ~32" high by memory. The boat is designed at ~16,000lbs, and the hull design doesn't take weight well, so if overloaded could be like SMJ states. It is also possible that the slamming wasn't unusual, but the reaction to it was large. It could be that the boat was simply over-driven in the conditions. Again, I didn't see the video.

Some boats still use rotating masts, although they don't seem to be the rage they once were. I don't think they are as practical or make much difference on a cruising boat. Loose rigging could be due to many things. It is more difficult to rig a rotating mast and keep it tight. The ball base needs good engineering and maintenance. Bad rigging, loose chainplates, or a main beam issue can also cause this type of problem, and would be unrelated to the actual rig type. Overall, catamaran rigs tend to be a bit looser than monohull - the leeward shroud might seem quite slack when hard on the wind to the uninitiated. Again, didn't see the video.

Mark


----------



## SanderO

I suspect the curve is stronger than a flat beam... it's like an arch. If the bows cut through a wave then the underside will likely hit the crest.


----------



## colemj

TakeFive said:


> I think that some of you are mischaracterizing SVAuspicious. He is extremely helpful and caring, and has many clients who just love him and the services he provides. He also does a lot to offer free assistance to the overall sailing community. Sailnet used to be part of that, and we here are much less well off without him participating. He is an industry professional with excellent and growing reputation. He was trained at USNA as a naval architect, which gives him an excellent background upon which he has built a lot of other expertise in marine electronics and other areas.


I had my say, and didn't mean to go back to this side topic, but I want to fully agree with your characterization of him here.

I also stand by my statement that what caused that whole kerfluffle was several people, including Auspicious, acting like 6yr olds and throwing hissy fits. I remain appalled that active efforts would be made to get anyone tossed off a forum (who wasn't actually dangerous). It was a mob.

These two statements aren't mutually exclusive. One can be a great asset, very knowledgeable, and still lose perspective occasionally.

If Auspicious was actually hunted out of SN, then I wouldn't blame him for staying away, and would respect that choice. It takes a strong person to return to that. But he wasn't - he left simply because he didn't like a person here and was mad that person was allowed back after the lynching.

I'm fairly recent to SN, even though I apparently registered an account many years ago. I'm still confused by, and trying to find my way through, the cult of personality factions here.

Mark


----------



## colemj

SanderO said:


> I suspect the curve is stronger than a flat beam... it's like an arch. If the bows cut through a wave then the underside will likely hit the crest.


It isn't really stronger in the strict sense because curved or flat, both have a large, strong main bulkhead above and connected to them spanning the entire width of the boat. The whole boat is actually hung on this bulkhead.

Curved does, however, present less of an direct impact area, and tends to deflect forces better than flat. This helps in keeping the feeling of pounding down. In the same extent, it also keeps the forces of pounding down, which is always a good thing.

But the overall strength between the two shouldn't differ. At most, a curved bridgedeck might allow a lighter main beam, but I wouldn't count on that and wouldn't think it makes much difference.

Mark


----------



## smj

colemj said:


> I don't think that is a flat spot on the Freydis bridgedeck - it is a bump out in the rear on each side where the berths are that is faired into the bridgedeck in the front. I think it is just in the shadows and makes it look like a continuous bridgedeck with a flat spot.
> 
> I haven't seen the video, so can't comment much on the slamming or rigging. The Freydis bridgedeck is generally considered a good design and is ~32" high by memory. The boat is designed at ~16,000lbs, and the hull design doesn't take weight well, so if overloaded could be like SMJ states. It is also possible that the slamming wasn't unusual, but the reaction to it was large. It could be that the boat was simply over-driven in the conditions. Again, I didn't see the video.
> 
> Some boats still use rotating masts, although they don't seem to be the rage they once were. I don't think they are as practical or make much difference on a cruising boat. Loose rigging could be due to many things. It is more difficult to rig a rotating mast and keep it tight. The ball base needs good engineering and maintenance. Bad rigging, loose chainplates, or a main beam issue can also cause this type of problem, and would be unrelated to the actual rig type. Overall, catamaran rigs tend to be a bit looser than monohull - the leeward shroud might seem quite slack when hard on the wind to the uninitiated. Again, didn't see the video.
> 
> Mark


I think I see what your talking about here in the stern where the bump outs are.








We looked at a Ocean Cat 49 the other day and the bridgedeck appeared quite a bit lower than the Freydis. The Ocean Cat was splashed of a Freydis 46 by the same guy that splashed the molds to make the original Manta. I'm guessing it also is a little heavier than LeRouge would have liked.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

Thanks for the feedback cole and smj. I can see how a curved surface would disperse the force quite a bit more and, seemingly, decrease the amount of slap. But as you can see, most of the new boats are moving away from the arch design. I assume that is to provide more interior volume. I don't recall slamming on the SLV Outremer to be nearly as violent as it seemed on the Freydis in the video. But as you say, there are too many variables between them to know for sure. With the "sharp" corners of the Leopard, my sense it that it would suffer heavier slams than the other more filleted corners of the other boats - but you still have that flat section which is just going to slap in some circumstances. 

As for the rigging, there just must have been something wrong on that Freydis. From what I recall, it was a new mast and rigging installed before they left. And, though I'm familiar with slack in the leward shrouds from some of our older, smaller boats - this was to the point that you would hear the Star Wars cable-twang when the rig would go tight as they came off a wave. They almost lost that shroud- and the rig. When the skip went up the mast to retrieve a skied halyard he saw that the twisted wire was failing at the fitting. They then went to the opposite tack (port) to keep the rig up. But they later discovered a crack in the port-side swage-ftting as well, and cracks at the base of that mast I believe. They got lucky.

So, maybe they were driving the boat to hard but it didn't look like it. It was just that they were doing an uphill west-east run across - so it would have naturally been harder on the boat.


----------



## colemj

smj said:


> I think I see what your talking about here in the stern where the bump outs are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We looked at a Ocean Cat 49 the other day and the bridgedeck appeared quite a bit lower than the Freydis. The Ocean Cat was splashed of a Freydis 46 by the same guy that splashed the molds to make the original Manta. I'm guessing it also is a little heavier than LeRouge would have liked.


email me about your impressions of that OC49. I know the history, but don't know much about the build quality or fit and finish. They were kinda "back yard built" boats for a production model, and I always wondered how they were holding up. I don't think this is necessarily related to this thread.

That's a bigger boat for you!

Mark


----------



## smj

We just did a harbor tour and ran across a Lagoon 39 and Catalac 27. What amazed me is they both appeared to have about the same bridgedeck height but even more amazing is the tunnel seemed to be about the same width. The Lagoon 39 has a beam of a little over 22' and the Catalac 13'6". That means the hulls of the Lagoon 39 are over 4' wider than the Catalac.









Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## chef2sail

SanderO said:


> chef's analysis of the thread seems accurate. Now I learn that Auspicious has been canned... what for?
> 
> I recall another knowledgeable sailor... whose nick I don't recall who was like a PR machine for the new monos coming onto the market and posted a lot of copy paste content. I found this somewhat interesting only because I am not in the market for a new boat and it becomes an intellectual exercise to understand and discuss the merits of new design solutions and the "problems" they address. So in the case the copy and paste provided a means for readers to see these "solutions" and discuss their features and attributes.
> 
> I suppose the same may apply to cats. But it gets a bit more complicated. There are sailing "features" with are consideration for all boats and there are some which apply to monos and others to cats. Something like aesthetics are of course subjective and so anyone with an OPINION is welcome to chime in. There are no right opinions only some may be better expressed and informed.
> 
> The discussion would be vastly better if it focused on specific attributes which are different in cats and monos... and if there was something other than an subjective means to compare them. So unless these vlog pastes really show the attribute under discussion... they are just spamming the thread with PR content.
> 
> Now 45 pages of comments it appears that target "use" for cats is for long term cruising in tropical climates... term charter in the same regions. The discussion needs to (I think) revolve around this type of sailing... and the charter use is not really relevant to the OP.
> 
> Some of the attributes to discuss may be as it applies to long term cruising:
> 
> stowage
> motoring range
> ventilation
> berths
> visibility for watch keeping
> sea motion
> steering issues
> anchoring
> storm tactics
> points of sail performance
> purchase cost
> maintenance cost
> 
> and so on


Just let me clear up something. Sv Auspicious wasn't canned. All i remember was a vicious thread in which he and Daddy disagreed about a new wireless Furuno radar . For every post Dave made there was a stream of contentious posts from Daddy with volume of google quotes .After that there was a banning and then when Daddy returned I never saw another post from Auspicious. Maybe this did not drive him away, but it looked like it did. Usually where there's smoke....there's fire. I wouldn't have blamed him.

Look I know and saw Dave in person. He And I disagreed a lot and at times did not get along. We certainly were no besties. We disagreed vehemently on topics like the firing of Annapolis Harbormaster , However there was a respect between us too. He did marvels for the sailing community in the Annapolis area. His contributions to SSCA stand for themselves. He gave of himself to other sailors in this area. As well on the forum.

His knowledge in electronics were as astute as Mainesails are in electrical. He also has a successful delivery business and sailed on many different boats firsthand, His posts were from experience . The type of first hand experience which carries credibility. We have all lost by whatever occurred .

" cut and paste sailors"....well that was in Dave's signature moniker on here.


----------



## smackdaddy

smj said:


> I think I see what your talking about here in the stern where the bump outs are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We looked at a Ocean Cat 49 the other day and the bridgedeck appeared quite a bit lower than the Freydis. The Ocean Cat was splashed of a Freydis 46 by the same guy that splashed the molds to make the original Manta. I'm guessing it also is a little heavier than LeRouge would have liked.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


That's what's so confounding about trying to judge these various aspects of these different boats. Look at this profile of the OC 49 compared to what we have been talking about above...










A VERY lean, mean machine. But the you look at the interior volume of the salon...










Are these newer cats just essentially driving the vertical volume with these higher/lower profiles AND at the same pushing that volume further forward? Or is this just an optical illusion in the photos?


----------



## MastUndSchotbruch

outbound said:


> Bye. Another thread ruin by SD.
> 
> May come back time to time to see if people stop playing a zero sum game.


Indeed.

Now that I realize Auspicious is gone, I notice that I haven't seen Mainesail posting here either for a while. I remember that Smackdaddy was giving him lectures on boat maintenance. I do hope we did not lose him, too.

It would be so nice to talk among mental adults. Like Mainesail and Auspicious. I am not going to waste my time arguing with someone with the maturity of a prepubescent brat. I just hope he stays out of other threads.

I am outta here.


----------



## smackdaddy

I came across an interesting site called "Catamaran Guru". You guys ever heard of this dude? He does make some interesting points regarding modern design trends in this article (many of which you guys have already touched on):

https://catamaranguru.com/catamaran...tamaran-trends-gimmicks-or-valid-design-ideas



> 1. Larger Catamarans for Fewer Crew
> The new generation of catamaran, using modern composite construction and engineering can be built lighter, larger, and more spacious with very good power-to-weight characteristics. Currently, the trend leans increasingly towards larger catamarans. The average catamaran for a cruising couple now tends to be more in the 45ft to 50ft range. With composite engineering and installation of technologically advanced equipment, e.g., electric winches, furling systems, and reliable auto pilot, it is now possible for shorthanded crews to confidently sail larger boats with larger rigs. Technology has enabled modern catamarans' bigger volume with more stiff and torsion resistant construction, without compromising stability and safety.
> 
> 2. Inside Out: Convertible Main Living Areas
> The design improvements of convertible living areas not only increases usable space and opens up the living areas, but also reduces interior maintenance and cleaning issues of traditional varnished wood surfaces. An open and convertible main living area with simple, hardwearing composite materials reduces costs and time required to clean and maintain the boat. Big windows and opening vents allow light in and increase visibility. Gone are the submarine-like claustrophobic cabins typical of most traditional yachts. Owners' cabins are luxurious, airy, and spacious serving as a very comfortable living space, rather than just a place to sleep.
> 
> 3. Wave-Piercing or Reverse Bows
> Wave-piercing or reverse bows are considered cutting-edge naval architecture and one of the latest popular catamaran
> design trends. These bows are trumpeted as state-of-the-art in cruising cat design, but some have their doubts. Bows are reversed and are designed to "cut" through waves, increasing performance and motion comfort by reducing pitching or hobby horsing. According to Gregor Tarjan, designer of the Alpha 42, "the faster and longer the catamaran, the more sense reverse bows make...however, the downside is that it makes for a wetter ride." This radical bow design certainly has visual appeal. Variations of reverse bows are in many new performance cruising designs by reputable performance cat builders like Catana, Alpha and Gunboat but the design is not quite as popular for regular cruising catamarans. The picture on the right is a demonstration of how a reverse / axebow behaves at different speeds.
> 
> 4. Bulkhead Helm Stations or Twin Stern Steering?
> Ultimately for a cruising catamaran, our preference is a safe, protected helm station with good visibility and all the control lines leading back to the helm to create a static control station. Push-button controlled winches and windlass as well as the instruments and autopilot should be prominently located and protected within the cockpit.
> 
> 5. The Flybridge Trend
> Getting from the cockpit up to the flybridge and back down in bad weather can prove unsafe. To accommodate the flybridge, the goose neck and boom must be very high making stowing the main problematic. The higher gooseneck position also means that the center of effort is higher which impacts the vessel's righting moment and is not as good as catamaran with a lower boom position and bulkhead steering. Just where the flybridge design will go is anybody's guess but right now it has huge appeal for a lot of people.
> 
> 6. Hydrofoils and Daggerboards
> Because of design innovations like curved daggerboards and the hydrofoils, performance on cruising catamarans has improved tremendously but catamaran speed is relative. The most important benefit of speed of a multihull is the ability to outrun bad weather. Being able to average 2-3 knots faster on a catamaran than on a monohull, can help avoid bad weather. Many cruisers often tell us at Catamaran Guru, "I don't care about performance," but its not long before they understand that the heavy cruising cat is not quite as comfortable at sea - AND very slow. It makes no sense to buy a catamaran that will not sail at least 200nm per day when making passage.
> 
> 7. Galley Up or Down
> In modern catamarans, the most popular trend currently is galley up, making it a focal point of the main living and entertainment areas. When at sea, every meal comes from the galley, so live-aboards spend a lot of time in the galley and many cruising couples and families find that the separation of galley down in a hull is not ideal. When at sea, hauling hot food up and down the stairs is a safety hazard. Having the galley on the same level as the serving area and cockpit is less tiring and safer. Also, ventilation is better on the bridgedeck than down in the hulls, which makes cooking more comfortable, especially if you are prone to seasickness. The disadvantage of the galley up design is less privacy for the cook's messes and it can significantly impact the size of the saloon seating area, especially on smaller cats.
> 
> Is Speed and Interior Comfort Trumping Good Design?
> As we said before, a trend makes sense for your boat when it fits your sailing purposes but most importantly, it is the ability for sailors to stay dry, warm, and as comfortable as possible when at sea. Paramount to safety is being able to handle the boat and sails in the safest, easiest environment possible. There are many characteristics that make a good ocean-going vessel but these three are more important than most:
> 
> 1. Catamaran stability is a function of beam and buoyancy, so light-weight strong construction, which translates into buoyancy, is a good thing. Typically cruising catamarans have a beam-to-length ratio of roughly 50%, meaning a 45' long cat will be about 22' wide. This will not only result in great interior space but also in a very stiff and efficient boat.
> 
> 2. The boat needs to have a robust COG (center of gravity) through good buoyancy fore and aft or waterline length to avoid "hobby horsing", making for a smoother ride and better performance. Performance is a safety issue; it is always better to have the pace to get out of the way of bad weather. So some speed in reserve is great.
> 
> 3. Good bridgedeck clearance is important for seaworthiness and crew comfort at sea, by reducing slamming and better performance in rough conditions. However, a very high bridge deck clearance, together with, say 6.5ft of headroom in the saloon, the boat will be very high with a lot of windage. So there has to be a balance struck between bridge deck clearance and the height in the salon. A good rule of thumb for bridge deck clearance is to have good clearance is about 5% of overall lenght of the hull but 6% is excellent. A claerance of 4% is acceptable but on the low side.
> 
> Even in the age of computer modeling, yacht design remains a series of compromises and the use of a boat will dictate its visual design and performance characteristics to a large degree. A well-designed catamaran is ergonomic and pleasing to the eye. It should be sensible and safe, with performance that can get to a safe harbor when necessary. It all comes down to safety and comfort, especially in rough conditions.


A good starting point for learning more about these multi-specific compromises. For example, I LOVE the look of the wave-piercing bow - but I would not choose that for my cruising cat.


----------



## smj

Probably good to talk about helms positions on catamarans. I love this helm setup, but what's up with that wheel?

__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content










Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

Wow. Definitely "helms-up". THAT would be a compromise I could live with.


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> Now THAT would be a compromise I could live with.


Figured this place could use a little tension release!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> That's what's so confounding about trying to judge these various aspects of these different boats......
> 
> Are these newer cats just essentially driving the vertical volume with these higher/lower profiles AND at the same pushing that volume further forward? Or is this just an optical illusion in the photos?


Both. And there is no free lunch. Speed and performance means long, thin hulls and a load restriction. Big interior volume with weight carrying ability means fat, wide hulls.

LeRouge's designs are older, so not really the ones to compare to the new production designs. Better to compare something like a Balance 52 with a Lagoon 50 in these regards. Even a current Schionning with a current Fountain Pajot. You will see that part of it is optical illusion (which means a talented designer), but much of it is also real.

Most of the production cats have become literal shoeboxes above the waterline. This is because the market drives it. However, they are taking different paths to providing this room. Lagoon just sticks a shoebox on extremely fat hulls and pays no attention to weight. Leopard seems to be doing some innovation with hull design to accommodate the payload while still giving a nod to performance (I need to use that term a bit callously). FP attempts to keep the build weight down, and takes a moderate approach to hull design. The other production builders do similar and various tradeoffs with their designs.

In the past, the cabin top was kept low, rounded and sleek because air resistance is also important to performance. However, the penalty is interior volume, which increases/decreases with the cube of dimensions, as well as being proportional with the geometric shape. More modern designs have done away with this thinking because air resistance is less important than water resistance - so it is a very reasonable tradeoff to gain interior space. I credit Lagoon with taking the first step here with their "pillbox" design, and most everyone else now has made similar compromises. For example, compare the new models from Outremer and Catana to their old models.

Pushing the volume forward is a tricky business. This is where marketing over-rides the design and engineering. There is no reasonable tradeoff from moving volume forward in a catamaran - it is always a big hit in performance and seakindliness with (IMO) little real practical gain in accommodations. It does help stuff in more berths and gives a ballroom in the saloon, but there is no good way to increase buoyancy in the bows of the boat without really suffering. This is different than doing the same in the sterns.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Thanks Mark - here are those comparisons for those following along...

Balance 52









Lagoon 50









Schionning Solitaire 1490









Fountaine Pajot 50









I love that Balance. Great looking boat. Though I'm not a big fan of their 451.


----------



## guitarguy56

MastUndSchotbruch said:


> I am outta here.


Great! Take SanderO, Register, TakeFive, Outbound, Chef, etc with you as none of you all have added to the discussion of multihulls but have tried to bait Smackdaddy into another reason to ban him! You all have not offered anything worth reading regarding the topic of the OP regarding anything associated with the thread.

Rant over!


----------



## David Summers

Interesting! Looking forward for more information!


----------



## SanderO

guitarguy56 said:


> Great! Take SanderO, Register, TakeFive, Outbound, Chef, etc with you as none of you all have added to the discussion of multihulls but have tried to bait Smackdaddy into another reason to ban him! You all have not offered anything worth reading regarding the topic of the OP regarding anything associated with the thread.
> 
> Rant over!


I have no interest in banning Daddy. I also have no interest in viewing vlogs of multis or monos... nor do I have an interest in baiting him regardless of whether or not I like his posts. He has every right to post as long as his posts meet the board rules.

I have no experience with cats... and no interest in buying one for multiple reasons. I am intellectually interested in attributes of all boat designs as solutions to different problems, needs, conditions and so on.


----------



## aa3jy

guitarguy56 said:


> Great! Take SanderO, Register, TakeFive, Outbound, Chef, etc with you as none of you all have added to the discussion of multihulls but have tried to bait Smackdaddy into another reason to ban him! You all have not offered anything worth reading regarding the topic of the OP regarding anything associated with the thread.
> 
> Rant over!


I try not to get involved but I'm curious why the moderator being the OP of this thread isn't moderating..there have been a few comments that have been very close if not crossed the line of internet style bullying... Let's keep this thread on track as I'm trying to learn something about catamarans.. Thanks,

Clay AA3JY


----------



## smackdaddy

I'm curious about the cruising multi owners we have posting in the thread thus far. By my count, I've got the following...

colemj
smj
dotdun

Then on the beachcat owner side I've got...

arcb
myownbadself

Anyone else I've overlooked?


----------



## guitarguy56

smackdaddy said:


> I'm curious about the cruising multi owners we have posting in the thread thus far. By my count, I've got the following...
> 
> colemj
> smj
> dotdun
> 
> Then on the beachcat owner side I've got...
> 
> arcb
> myownbadself
> 
> Anyone else I've overlooked?


I would have been added to this list this summer upon the delivery of our FP 40, but Smack you know the story... Hopefully we may again get the catamaran fever once more when 'bodies' heal... but it doesn't mean we can't enjoy a thread about multihulls and I know you wanted me to start this thread and glad the moderator stepped in.


----------



## smackdaddy

guitarguy56 said:


> I would have been added to this list this summer upon the delivery of our FP 40, but Smack you know the story... Hopefully we may again get the catamaran fever once more when 'bodies' heal... but it doesn't mean we can't enjoy a thread about multihulls and I know you wanted me to start this thread and glad the moderator stepped in.


Yeah, I know the story and really hope things come back around for you guys on that. I don't see why you shouldn't be included on that list too - even if it's a bit early. And count me jealous on that FP40!


----------



## ImGary01

aa3jy said:


> I try not to get involved but I'm curious why the moderator being the OP of this thread isn't moderating..there have been a few comments that have been very close if not crossed the line of internet style bullying... Let's keep this thread on track as I'm trying to learn something about catamarans.. Thanks,
> 
> Clay AA3JY


Thank you for trying to get everyone back on topic. I too am trying to learn about multi's and comparing to mono's since I am preparing for my first cruising boat purchase. I plan to live aboard so need to make a good decision up front.


----------



## guitarguy56

smackdaddy said:


> Yeah, I know the story and really hope things come back around for you guys on that. I don't see why you shouldn't be included on that list too - even if it's a bit early. And count me jealous on that FP40!


Smack... Like I mentioned earlier take a tour at the boat show in your area or take a trip to the Miami Boat Show, you'll be impressed on the Lucia 40 model quality for the price it's going for... the Helia 44 was very nice as well but didn't offer more than the Lucia model. For a cruising couple the Lucia is really all you need at least that is what we came away with.


----------



## smackdaddy

guitarguy56 said:


> Smack... Like I mentioned earlier take a tour at the boat show in your area or take a trip to the Miami Boat Show, you'll be impressed on the Lucia 40 model quality for the price it's going for... the Helia 44 was very nice as well but didn't offer more than the Lucia model. For a cruising couple the Lucia is really all you need at least that is what we came away with.


I see what you mean about the Lucia vs the Helia. I really like the open layout of the Lucia...










It's a great looking boat and seems to be just the right size for me. It's great looking at these new models because they will probably be the used boats I'll be in the market for in 3-4 years.


----------



## guitarguy56

smackdaddy said:


> I see what you mean about the Lucia vs the Helia. I really like the open layout of the Lucia...
> 
> It's a great looking boat and seems to be just the right size for me. It's great looking at these new models because they will probably be the used boats I'll be in the market for in 3-4 years.


The walk around tour is even better... While not the Lucia model here is the Helia in 30 knots weather.






Sorta takes the breath out of the cat haters!


----------



## smackdaddy

I want to get a bit more information on this from the article I linked above...



> 4. Bulkhead Helm Stations or Twin Stern Steering?
> Ultimately for a cruising catamaran, our preference is a safe, protected helm station with good visibility and all the control lines leading back to the helm to create a static control station. Push-button controlled winches and windlass as well as the instruments and autopilot should be prominently located and protected within the cockpit.
> 
> 5. The Flybridge Trend
> Getting from the cockpit up to the flybridge and back down in bad weather can prove unsafe. To accommodate the flybridge, the goose neck and boom must be very high making stowing the main problematic. The higher gooseneck position also means that the center of effort is higher which impacts the vessel's righting moment and is not as good as catamaran with a lower boom position and bulkhead steering. Just where the flybridge design will go is anybody's guess but right now it has huge appeal for a lot of people.


It's been discussed a bit above, but I'm still trying to figure out what the "most effective" overall solution/compromise is. Intuitively, I like the twin stern approach (just makes sense to me based on how I've sailed thus far) - but I do like the way Outremer has the hybrid approach (tillers with an elevated but not too elevated helm station)..










I like the redundancy of the tillers - though I do think it's a bit strange to have them there all the time. Are they easily removable and replaceable?

The FP Lucia has the raised deck-level helm as well - but it's not too raised (a semi-fly-bridge?)...










Then you get to the true fly-bridge like this Lagoon 52...










Now, apart from the fact that I'm just definitely not a fan of the fly-bridge, another thing I'm trying to figure out is how they are balancing the sail power and/or the higher-lever arm of that power as the boom goes up. I assume they are just making the main smaller? And if that's the case, it seems like you are giving up a HUGE amount of performance.

Thoughts?


----------



## smackdaddy

PS - I want to encourage all the readers of this thread (I see between 50-100 at any one time) to come on in and ask questions, etc. There just aren't a whole lot of good resources out there for multis (cruising, performance, etc.). You've got a small handful of very cool, very knowledgeable multi owners/cruisers here that have the answers. That's valuable.


----------



## smackdaddy

Great article by Charlie Doane...

7 Points to Consider When Shopping for a Catamaran


----------



## guitarguy56

Not sure how many read this article and reasons why some will never go back to mono-hulls as you would expect once you're cruising in one.

https://www.cruisingworld.com/sailboats/why-cat

Yeah we know... more 'cut-n-paste' articles... :devil


----------



## smackdaddy

Another great video of an older cat in heavy seas...

*Sailing Bare Poles in Heavy Seas*

The woman on the wheel is doing a great job steering and the boat is well in control - and the comfort and stability from the lack of roll you'd get on a mono is very evident. But I'd certainly go for the AP. I'm coming to believe that an AP is a very important piece of kit on these babies!


----------



## jtsailjt

Smackdaddy, you seem to be about the most aggressively pro cat person on this site and yet you don't own a cruising cat so I couldn't help but start to wonder about that. Are you in the market for one and having difficulty finding just the right one for you, or trying to save money to buy one or it's just not the right time for you to go cruising? Just wondering why someone who feels so strongly about the advantages of a particular kind of boat doesn't have one? If you're actively shopping for one, what size and type cat do you think would be best for you that's within your budget?


----------



## DougM

A few years ago I bought a Gemini 105mc , moving from Hunter 33 which I had a wonderful time on for 7 years. The Gemini is smaller than a lot of the boats being discussed, but it is a whole lot more spacious than the hunter, and has turned out to be ideal for my wife and I. 

Once the idea of potentially owning a multihull got stuck in my head, I spent a lot of time researching on the internet, including the forums of course. There were a load of opinions out there. There was the 'you'll die a horrible death bobbing upside down' camp. Also there was the 'cats are a horrilbe idea, the motion is awful, they cant go upwind, etc. camp. Opposing them was some enthusiasts, and also a small number of cat owners who shared their experiences. I assumed the latter were the most credible (otherwise I'd be paralyzed with fear of an upside down death  After this research and a whole lot of shopping I decided to take the plunge. Thanks to all those owners who shared their experiences, without you it is very possible I wound't have taken the leap. So I thought i'd share my own experience for those who could benefit.

Here's how it's been so far:
1. I'mreally happy with the increased space and comfort, perfect for my cruising habits (a few weeks a year cruising plus weekends and daysails with my wife and i plus guests or my buddies and i) or daysails with crew ranging from single handed to 15 people.
2. It's plenty seaworthy, and handles our interesting seas and abundant wind in my neighbourhood (cape breton, brasdor lakes, gulf of st lawrence, pei, nfld) every bit as well as my previous monohulls.
3. I love the speed compare to my 33 ft monohull. 6 or 7 knots tight to the wind, crack off a little and 8 or 9 knots is easy if you have breze. 10-11 max sustained when everything is right and wind is howling.
4. upwind performance is comparable to any other ordinary cruising monohull that i've sailed on. Points a little better than the hunter (not a performance boat but a comparison all the same)
5. it fits nicely in the travellift at our club which really simplifies the overall ownership experience and reduces cost.
6. hard dodger is awesome for shade in hot summer days or in bad weather. canvas cockpit enclosure is phenomenal in colder weather in shoulder season (i manage to get 6 months out of season, from mid may to late november)
7 it is so much easier on passages with minimal heeling. You don't fight weather helm and can steer with one finger (takes getting used to as you have to rely more on instruments and sail observations to trim)
8 what can i say about on anchor ... brilliant. when rafted, most often the go to boat.
9 I'm pleased to say that, within reason, everything they say about not spilling drinks in a seaway is true 
10 huge storage space compared to the hunter.
11 Kick up centerboards and rudder give it an incredibly shallow draft that lets me travel in shallow water with greatly reduced worries, and to anchor in way more places.
12 I love the bridgedeck diesel and steerable driveleg (point of contention with some I know). way more maneuverable than my old shaft drive mono. No barnalces or corrosion or drag while sailing. I did a mod on it adding power tilt/trim which made it way more convenient.
13. Dont have to go down a companionway while heeled to get refreshments from fridge. Did i mention they don't spill - oh yeah, i already did so 

In fact I can really say that i dont have any regrets at all about making the move (which is really wonderful to be able to say because my last boat was a great experience as well).

Hope this is helpful to anyone thinking about buying a smaller cruising cat like the Gemini.


----------



## smackdaddy

Thanks Doug. As a former Hunter owner myself - that's great feedback.


----------



## smackdaddy

jtsailjt said:


> Smackdaddy, you seem to be about the most aggressively pro cat person on this site and yet you don't own a cruising cat so I couldn't help but start to wonder about that.


I've sailed/raced/cruised monos for a decade. I bought a crappy old beachcat and fixed it up with my boys. I was absolutely blown away by the speed of the thing...even when sailing "slow and stable". This started my interest.

So I started researching by watching every video I could of those out there cruising multis - as well as looking through marketing materials - and reading TONS of articles and reviews. After sailing (and loving) monos for so long - the space and comfort of these boats blew my mind. I want to not just "live aboard" - but live _well _aboard. These boats offer that - hands down.

But, most importantly, it was the "relaxation" at sea in these cats that became the feature that hooked me. There is so much less "drama" on these boats that I honestly see that as a safety factor. I also see it as a *longevity* factor - meaning that I can likely cruise a cat until I'm as old as dirt.



jtsailjt said:


> Are you in the market for one and having difficulty finding just the right one for you, or trying to save money to buy one or it's just not the right time for you to go cruising?


Yes. I'm definitely in the market - but I have a few years before I'll pull that trigger. Again, my plan is to purchase in the Med and hang out for a few years there, then head west. I'm not ready for that yet as I've got another kid in school. But that certainly doesn't dissuade my eagerness to research and find what's right for me. That's why I'm most interested in the new boats. Those will be what I purchase in 3-4 years or so.



jtsailjt said:


> Just wondering why someone who feels so strongly about the advantages of a particular kind of boat doesn't have one?


See my explanation above. And it's only been reinforced by those who know. I know there will be certain differences and compromises - but I'm done with monos. No question.



jtsailjt said:


> If you're actively shopping for one, what size and type cat do you think would be best for you that's within your budget?


40' is probably my sweetspot. And budget depends on a lot of things - obviously. For example, with the way the used cat market is right now (used prices somewhat inflated by historical prices) - I might still go with a new boat. Prices are coming down significantly as demand and production increase. So we'll see.

I have no doubt about going with a multi. I just don't know yet if that means 2 or 3 hulls. But one is done for me. For sure. I mean, when we arrive at this kind of stupidity...










...I can only be embarrassed for the entire sailing world.


----------



## guitarguy56

DougM said:


> A few years ago I bought a Gemini 105mc , moving from Hunter 33 which I had a wonderful time on for 7 years. The Gemini is smaller than a lot of the boats being discussed, but it is a whole lot more spacious than the hunter, and has turned out to be ideal for my wife and I.
> 
> Once the idea of potentially owning a multihull got stuck in my head, I spent a lot of time researching on the internet, including the forums of course. There were a load of opinions out there. There was the 'you'll die a horrible death bobbing upside down' camp. Also there was the 'cats are a horrilbe idea, the motion is awful, they cant go upwind, etc. camp. Opposing them was some enthusiasts, and also a small number of cat owners who shared their experiences. I assumed the latter were the most credible (otherwise I'd be paralyzed with fear of an upside down death  After this research and a whole lot of shopping I decided to take the plunge. Thanks to all those owners who shared their experiences, without you it is very possible I wound't have taken the leap. So I thought i'd share my own experience for those who could benefit.
> 
> Here's how it's been so far:
> 1. I'mreally happy with the increased space and comfort, perfect for my cruising habits (a few weeks a year cruising plus weekends and daysails with my wife and i plus guests or my buddies and i) or daysails with crew ranging from single handed to 15 people.
> 2. It's plenty seaworthy, and handles our interesting seas and abundant wind in my neighbourhood (cape breton, brasdor lakes, gulf of st lawrence, pei, nfld) every bit as well as my previous monohulls.
> 3. I love the speed compare to my 33 ft monohull. 6 or 7 knots tight to the wind, crack off a little and 8 or 9 knots is easy if you have breze. 10-11 max sustained when everything is right and wind is howling.
> 4. upwind performance is comparable to any other ordinary cruising monohull that i've sailed on. Points a little better than the hunter (not a performance boat but a comparison all the same)
> 5. it fits nicely in the travellift at our club which really simplifies the overall ownership experience and reduces cost.
> 6. hard dodger is awesome for shade in hot summer days or in bad weather. canvas cockpit enclosure is phenomenal in colder weather in shoulder season (i manage to get 6 months out of season, from mid may to late november)
> 7 it is so much easier on passages with minimal heeling. You don't fight weather helm and can steer with one finger (takes getting used to as you have to rely more on instruments and sail observations to trim)
> 8 what can i say about on anchor ... brilliant. when rafted, most often the go to boat.
> 9 I'm pleased to say that, within reason, everything they say about not spilling drinks in a seaway is true
> 10 huge storage space compared to the hunter.
> 11 Kick up centerboards and rudder give it an incredibly shallow draft that lets me travel in shallow water with greatly reduced worries, and to anchor in way more places.
> 12 I love the bridgedeck diesel and steerable driveleg (point of contention with some I know). way more maneuverable than my old shaft drive mono. No barnalces or corrosion or drag while sailing. I did a mod on it adding power tilt/trim which made it way more convenient.
> 13. Dont have to go down a companionway while heeled to get refreshments from fridge. Did i mention they don't spill - oh yeah, i already did so
> 
> In fact I can really say that i dont have any regrets at all about making the move (which is really wonderful to be able to say because my last boat was a great experience as well).
> 
> Hope this is helpful to anyone thinking about buying a smaller cruising cat like the Gemini.


Awesome post! Thanks for the insight into what we are now believing regarding multi-hulls.

irateraft:


----------



## guitarguy56

smackdaddy said:


> Another great video of an older cat in heavy seas...
> 
> *Sailing Bare Poles in Heavy Seas*
> 
> The woman on the wheel is doing a great job steering and the boat is well in control - and the comfort and stability from the lack of roll you'd get on a mono is very evident. But I'd certainly go for the AP. I'm coming to believe that an AP is a very important piece of kit on these babies!


Smack I saw all the videos of the Pilgrim... a great little catamaran and doing the things it's designed for... a mono would never do some of the sailing the Pilgrim has gone and survived. :eek

Thanks...


----------



## guitarguy56

smackdaddy said:


> 40' is probably my sweetspot. And budget depends on a lot of things - obviously. For example, with the way the used cat market is right now (used prices somewhat inflated by historical prices) - I might still go with a new boat. Prices are coming down significantly as demand and production increase. So we'll see.


Smack... A 'very good' price for a FP Lucia 40.... but you'll need to update the ole passport. :grin

2018 Fountaine Pajot Lucia 40 Sail Boat For Sale - www.yachtworld.com


----------



## ImGary01

guitarguy56 said:


> Smack... A 'very good' price for a FP Lucia 40.... but you'll need to update the ole passport. :grin
> 
> The price is for 50% ownership. "client looking for a project partner to 50% finance a brand new Fountaine Pajot Lucia 40"


----------



## smj

smackdaddy said:


> I want to get a bit more information on this from the article I linked above...
> 
> It's been discussed a bit above, but I'm still trying to figure out what the "most effective" overall solution/compromise is. Intuitively, I like the twin stern approach (just makes sense to me based on how I've sailed thus far) - but I do like the way Outremer has the hybrid approach (tillers with an elevated but not too elevated helm station)..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like the redundancy of the tillers - though I do think it's a bit strange to have them there all the time. Are they easily removable and replaceable?
> 
> The FP Lucia has the raised deck-level helm as well - but it's not too raised (a semi-fly-bridge?)...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then you get to the true fly-bridge like this Lagoon 52...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now, apart from the fact that I'm just definitely not a fan of the fly-bridge, another thing I'm trying to figure out is how they are balancing the sail power and/or the higher-lever arm of that power as the boom goes up. I assume they are just making the main smaller? And if that's the case, it seems like you are giving up a HUGE amount of performance.
> 
> Thoughts?


I'm not a fan of the fly bridge. Raises the CG and CE. More motion up there, limited visibility when job or screecher is set and a bunch of stairs to climb. Would be nice for evening cocktails in a calm anchorage.
I like the Outremer setup. The twin tillers to get the joy of a good sail when the weather is nice and behind the bulkhead when weather is snotty or maneuvering under power.
The problem with twin helms in the stern of the boat is possible lack of visibility if you can't see over the deck house and sun protection.
Single wheel behind the bulkhead is probably the most common installation but I really like the twin wheel setup of the Seawind.








Nice flat unobstructed pathway between the 2 helms and good interaction with people in the salon.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

Whatever direction I end up going with the helm, I imagine it's going to take some real time and effort to get used to "sensing" the opposite side of the boat from the wheel while maneuvering in tight quarters.


----------



## smj

Another catamaran bashing its way across the Atlantic





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## smackdaddy

smj - thanks for turning me onto those Young Punks in the Nautitech 40. They are great...






Now following.


----------



## smackdaddy

Though the graphics really suck in this article they are really informative and get at what makes a cat "good or bad" for cruising...

https://www.atlantic-cruising.com/good-cat-bad-cat/



> This page was put together from interviews with builders, designers, delivery captains, owners, charterers and from our own personal experiences delivering boats up and down the East Coast, offshore and vacations aboard with both experienced and inexperienced catamaran sailors. It's both practical and technical. The information is not intended to support any particular product, though we obviously have chosen Fountaine Pajot because we believe it is a good example of our discoveries. Many people get referred to this page by other dealers and owners.





> This paper is designed to highlight the 4 important distinctions that will help you understand the builders' intent. Is he offering an inshore or offshore Cat? The 4 important criteria to consider (aside from overall quality and integrity) are:
> 
> Stability. Beam to Length ratio and Static Stability
> Pitching. The comfort factor
> Bridge Deck Clearance
> The Control Cockpit. Flybridge or deck-level?
> Load Carrying Capacity





> What is Wrong With This Picture?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's missing is the bridge deck clearance! The single, most important factor is the load carrying capability! This affects everything else. Find out more below&#8230;





> Virtually all of the experienced builders, especially the European builders who must sail their boats transatlantic to their bases in the Caribbean, have settled on a minimum length to beam ratio (L/B) of approximately 50%. That's a 20′ beam on a 40′ boat. As the boat gets larger, over 50′ or so, you can back off from this ratio a bit and still have adequate stability. These same experienced builders put enough beam into the individual hulls to give more than adequate load carrying ability. One sign of an older design (often resurrected these days and promoted as new) is narrow individual hulls, sometimes supplanted by (needed) extra beam because the hulls no longer have the required buoyancy.
> 
> (By the way, you can often recognize these designs from inside because the berths will be high and spanning the bridge deck‐‐the hulls don't have enough volume to carry 4 full size double berths! Watch out!)


Lots to digest in this one...and I smell some typical BS here and there. But one of the more extensive I've seen.


----------



## smackdaddy

Okay - another question for the multi guys - daggerboards.

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, daggerboards are primarily for upwind sailing. And, from what I understand, they buy you another 10° or so of pointing - putting you in roughly the same range off the wind as a mono.

BUT - the arguments go that "well-designed" fixed-keels will get you within 5° of that, and that the added rigging, mechanics, etc. for daggerboards is not worth it in the long run unless most of your sailing will upwind and/or racing.

What do you guys think? If 10° - *or especially 5°* - is really all I'm losing, I'm not sure it's something I'd insist on.


----------



## FSMike

Smack - there are two advantages to daggerboards (or centerboards). In addition to giving increased pointing ability when lowered, they give the advantage of really shallow draft when raised.
My current cat draws 3'7" with keels, it would probably be a foot less if she had boards and kick up rudders. I think this difference is greater on the larger cats.

It's wonderful to be able to anchor safely in the Bahamas in 5 or 6' of water. The monos can't drag down on you because they'll run aground lol.

While I think about it, in regards to an earlier post of yours referring to getting used to where the corners of the boat are, on non-heeling boats you just amble to the other side of the cockpit and look. I do that while docking, under sail, whatever. It's easy when the boat's on the level.

Whatever you decide to get, enjoy!


----------



## smackdaddy

Great feedback. Thanks Mike! I especially like the thought of going where no mono has been before.

The Solaris is a nice boat BTW...










PS - Am I seeing this right that these have mini bow-bulbs?


----------



## FSMike

LOL! Thank you, that's her in the top picture. The bottom picture is a different design. Solaris made a number of boats with "sun" in the name. Mine is a Sunstar, originally designed by Erik LeRouge who designed the Manta and many others.
Just recently put her on the market, details and more pics at the broker's website, finishlineotc.com.
Somebody buy her, might take a folding tri in partial trade, just don't tell my wife.


----------



## smackdaddy

No WAY!!!! _MANDOLIN_ is yours?

We'll there you go. Unintentional promotion!


----------



## FSMike

Yep, Mandolin's my girl, technically Mandolin IV.

The original was a 26' double ended gaff rigger. I named her that because she was "a small well crafted instrument that played beautiful music". The name has been with me and my boats ever since.

We now return you to your original thread.


----------



## smj

Mandolin used to be ours, but under a different name. The Sunstar was known as a mini Manta, started life as a LeRouge designed Jeffcat 32 then I believe the molds were sold and she became the Passion 32. LeRouge doesn't recognize either the Sunstar or Manta being his design as they were both built quite a bit heavier than his specs.
Also a couple of other advantages to daggerboards are, less wetted surface when pulled up sailing downwind and the ability to increase leeway therefore giving the possibility of a better point of sail while maintaining your desired course.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> Okay - another question for the multi guys - daggerboards.
> 
> So, if I'm understanding this correctly, daggerboards are primarily for upwind sailing. And, from what I understand, they buy you another 10° or so of pointing - putting you in roughly the same range off the wind as a mono.
> 
> BUT - the arguments go that "well-designed" fixed-keels will get you within 5° of that, and that the added rigging, mechanics, etc. for daggerboards is not worth it in the long run unless most of your sailing will upwind and/or racing.
> 
> What do you guys think? If 10° - *or especially 5°* - is really all I'm losing, I'm not sure it's something I'd insist on.


You can't really look at it that way because in almost all cases, you will be comparing apples to oranges because you will be comparing completely different hull designs. For example, an Outremer 45 with daggers is going to far outpoint and go faster upwind than a Lagoon 450. Probably more than 10*, but also with a much better VMG.

What you need for your analysis is the same boat built with daggers and mini keels.

Erik LeRouge has done just that, and builds many of his boats both ways. I think I remember Derek Kelsall and possibly Kurt Hughes have also. I believe Chris White has done engineering analysis along this line (don't know if he actually built any both ways). In these cases - the same boat with different keel/daggers - they found that the performance differences were not that great, and mostly manifested in light air. But there were measurable performance differences across the board. LeRouge stated that daggers were definitely needed for higher performance, but that a cruising tradeoff of mini keels was a reasonable one for their benefits, while still retaining reasonable performance.

However, they build fast hulls. I don't think sticking daggers on a Lagoon 450 is going to help it much.

So the dagger/no dagger debate is really a proxy for what type of hull shape and boat philosophy one has/wants. Catanas and Outremers are not higher performance boats because they have dagger boards. They are higher performance because they have narrower longer hulls, lighter weights, and better proportioned weight distributions than Lagoons and Fountaine Pajots. Put mini keels on the Catanas and Outremers and they will still walk away from the Lagoons and Fountaine Pajots. Put daggers on the Lagoons and FP's and it won't help them much.

However, put 8,000lbs of stuff on them and the Lagoons and FP's might just walk away from them.

The dagger catamarans I've sailed go upwind very, very well. Better than almost all cruising monohulls, and the same as the more performance cruising monohulls. They also do better than similar build mini keel catamarans. The difference is real, but the tradeoffs are also.

Personally, I like sailing dagger catamarans, and when we are in light air, or hard on the wind needing to pinch, I wish we had daggers. For all other times, I am happier with mini keels. An approach like Chris White's of a foil stub for protections and sitting on, combined with daggers, is probably the best.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

I see what you mean Mark. Thanks for that.


----------



## FSMike

colemj said:


> ----- An approach like Chris White's of a foil stub for protections and sitting on, combined with daggers, is probably the best.
> 
> Mark


I think Mark is right. 
I spent about 10 years aboard a Chris White design, one he designated a Voyager 45. She had two keels and one daggerboard. Draft was 3'6" (I think) board up, and 7'3" board down. We rarely used the board because the boat sailed so well without it. Chris White can draw a hell of a boat. We did use it occasionally in light air, or when we were trying to point really high for some reason, or in one of the infrequent races we entered.
Should be able to find this boat on Chris' web site, I think under custom catamarans or some such.


----------



## seabeau

smackdaddy said:


> Okay - another question for the multi guys - daggerboards.
> 
> So, if I'm understanding this correctly, daggerboards are primarily for upwind sailing. And, from what I understand, they buy you another 10° or so of pointing - putting you in roughly the same range off the wind as a mono.
> 
> BUT - the arguments go that "well-designed" fixed-keels will get you within 5° of that, and that the added rigging, mechanics, etc. for daggerboards is not worth it in the long run unless most of your sailing will upwind and/or racing.
> 
> What do you guys think? If 10° - *or especially 5°* - is really all I'm losing, I'm not sure it's something I'd insist on.


 Multi-hulls with deep hulls suffer with the same problems that mono-hulls suffer with breaking water, except for the fact that the external ballast in mono's will SOMETIMES allow them to recover. A multi-hull inverted will remain inverted. Shallow hulled mono-hulls and multi-hulls are inherently safer in breaking water. The daggerboard/centerboard is simply a way out of the conundrum of shallow draft and up wind ability. . The Chris White tris are an excellent case in point. The Hammerhead has a two and one half foot draft board up and a nine foot draft board down. Superior safety and superior upwind performance. PS. And no pounding going upwind.


----------



## smackdaddy

Here is another great video by SLV crossing the Atlantic. They hit some sustained 30+ about half-way across. Riley is injured and can't do a whole lot, but they both talk about how comfortable the Outremer is in those conditions - while sitting at the table with dishes in front of them - very relaxed and rested...






Seeing is believing.


----------



## smackdaddy

Quite a boat...


----------



## SanderO

smackdaddy said:


> Quite a boat...
> 
> McConaghy MC50 CAT | First Look | Yachting World - YouTube


This boat has some very interesting engineering and design details. However I find it very ugly... the exterior in particular. The interior looks fine but hardly "nautical". I suppose this is the "new aesthetic" and we will be seeing more along these lines in the future. I doubt people will be neutral on this... either liking it or completely rejecting it.

I enjoyed the presentation.


----------



## Sal Paradise

SanderO said:


> This boat has some very interesting engineering and design details. However I find it very ugly... the exterior in particular. The interior looks fine but hardly "nautical". I suppose this is the "new aesthetic" and we will be seeing more along these lines in the future. I doubt people will be neutral on this... either liking it or completely rejecting it.
> 
> I enjoyed the presentation.


I liked the interior, but it and the boat on the whole reminded more of a very nice small modernist house. It didn't tick that box for me that a beautiful boat can. Also, I didn't like the walnut looking veneer. But I bet its a great place to lounge around on and gently sail in the BVI's.


----------



## smackdaddy

Sal Paradise said:


> I liked the interior, but it and the boat on the whole reminded more of a very nice small modernist house. It didn't tick that box for me that a beautiful boat can. But I bet its great to lounge around on and gently sail in the BVI's.


I'm curious Sal, what would lead you to the conclusion that this boat is only capable of gently sailing in the BVI's?


----------



## SanderO

smackdaddy said:


> I'm curious Sal, what would lead you to the conclusion that this boat is only capable of gently sailing in the BVI's?


He didn't write ONLY, but noted it would be comfy for the BVIs.

It floats, it sails and so it a sailboat... but it doesn't hit any of the familiar notes of what a sailboat is or looks like. The latter is apparently not as important to those who buy and sail this "look"... they want "comfort" and space. Looks easy to sail as well.


----------



## Sal Paradise

smackdaddy said:


> I'm curious Sal, what would lead you to the conclusion that this boat is only capable of gently sailing in the BVI's?


Its very open, huge windows, the whole back. Don't get me wrong, I'd cut one of my nuts off for that boat. I'm not even kidding.

But based on the open look.. heat loss in colder climates. Huge windows that could get smashed by a wave. Of course, I assume that engineers designed it to work and it would be safe in challenging ocean conditions.

But I really did mean it would be fantastic in the BVI's. But if it was mine, anywhere from Grenada to Charleston.


----------



## smackdaddy

Sal Paradise said:


> Its very open, huge windows, the whole back. Don't get me wrong, I'd cut one of my nuts off for that boat. I'm not even kidding.
> 
> But based on the open look.. heat loss in colder climates. Huge windows that could get smashed by a wave. Of course, I assume that engineers designed it to work and it would be safe in challenging ocean conditions.
> 
> But I really did mean it would be fantastic in the BVI's. But if it was mine, anywhere from Grenada to Charleston.


I see. I agree that this probably wouldn't be a great boat for very cold weather.

As for the windows, with huge advances in materials technology - those "glass" panels are very likely stronger than the surrounding materials they are set into.

http://www.yachtingworld.com/specia...igners-woke-up-to-the-benefits-of-glass-99196



> McKeon, for one, has been commissioning finite element analysis to prove that glass can be used to a greater extent in more structural situations: *"We still design with glass at 2.3 times the strength of the surrounding structure,"* he explains.





> Bolton explains: "An interlayer is created by using a heat-sensitive adhesive - it is heated in a vacuum. The interlayer floats as a clear adhesive. The structure created using modern hydrophobic interlayers is a game changer.


It's just not an issue like it was 40+ years ago.


----------



## SanderO

Lots of glass can be very nice... no doubt about that. But it can also be over bright and become hot... hence all the various window treatments we install for clients with lots of large windows. And privacy is also an issue with the interior so exposed. It can be like living in a fish bowl. May not be an issue in an empty anchorage... but in a crowded one it would be.


----------



## outbound

Think your perspective changes after living aboard for awhile and depending on where you are.
Found we leave all the shades closed when in the tropics. Not just to prevent fabrics from fading but for comfort. Maybe the first few days you want to look around there but when you live there it’s no biggie. 
Don’t like the AC nor do many. Need the generator on - fuel cost and noise. So see many boats with shades closed and awnings up with hatches/ scoops deployed. Commonly see further shading of cockpit even if obscures the view. 
Usually only the saloon and daytime living spaces have the glass inserts. The typical multi has the berths in the hulls so privacy isn’t the issue. Being in the sun’s glare all the time gets tiring. A dark cool spot with the breeze coming in the boat is pleasant. 
Think one of the weak spots in certain current offerings both mono and multi is ventilation. Not just talking about mold but also quality of life. I love my wife but often one goes outside and one stays inside if we want space either to do a task requiring detailed attention or thought or just to contemplate our navel.
The concept of single level living is appealing but makes privacy from other occupants on the boat more difficult. Thread here mentions privacy from the outside but private quiet spaces in the boat are equally important in my view.


----------



## Sal Paradise

This is sort of my taste in sailing cats. They have a look that makes me want to sail one. BTW this beauty is for sale for $779,000 which means I won't ever have to worry about convincing my wife.




























https://chriswhitedesigns.smugmug.com/ATLANTIC-CATAMARANS/Atlantic-42/i-hWLgRm6


----------



## smackdaddy

Personally, I think lots of windows/portlights are great. As long as the boat can be opened up for ventilation - which is obviously not an issue for the MC50 in that vid - it's great to be able to have that kind of view, both sailing and at anchor. And there are always blinds and shades if you want to add them. At least this way you have the choice.


----------



## smackdaddy

I've seen it mentioned several times that "cats can't really sail upwind - especially charter boats". In this thread a couple of actual cat owners addressed this issue above, countering that widely-held notion. So, it really seems to boil down to people making false assumptions *about the boats* based on *lack of knowledge in how to sail them* (either themselves coming from monos for a charter, or seeing charter boats around them that are motoring instead of sailing).

In other words, you should never blame the boat for the inabilities of the captain.

In the video below my good pal Nigel Irens explains the *real* differences between monos and multis (e.g. - multis will NOT pinch like a mono, and you can run into tacking problems if you try to do it like you do on your mono which is much more forgiving of bad form). But the video also walks you through how to do it correctly. In the end, as he says, there is only a 5°-10° difference in pointing angle between a mono and multi (although obviously a huge difference in speed - and many other advantages). This is what has been pointed out above as well in this thread.

So, if you're a mono sailor and you're going to charter a multi - maybe you should watch this video closely so you can learn and show other mono sailors in that area how it should be done instead of being that guy who motors everywhere and then blames the boat...


----------



## colemj

One also needs perspective on the points you bring up. It seems that the term "Monohull" is often given a free ride when it comes to describing windward performance. However, a large number of the monohulls I see out cruising are of the type Morgan OI, Formosa, Tayana, Gozzard, Island Packet, etc.

I promise you that these are not upwind machines. Most production catamarans will easily keep up to them upwind, let alone out-perform them.

One cannot have their dogmatic "blue water monohull" AND their superior "upwind performance" without moving into price and size categories that put them in contention with similar (out)performing catamarans.

I haven't looked at the linked video yet, but can say there really isn't too much difference between sailing a catamaran upwind vs. a monohull. On a catamaran, one should foot off a bit right before a tack to gain a bit more speed, tack decisively, then foot off a bit on the new tack to regain speed and then come up to the best VMG. After that, it is a matter of sailing to VMG - just like a monohull. 

Where I think the largest misperception occurs is that monohull sailors often associate pinching with performance. They get a tight wind angle with lots of heel and forces and water flying everywhere, and confuse this with good VMG - while laughing at the catamarans who aren't holding the same wind angle. 

Catamarans won't pinch. They will feel slow and heavy and even stop dead in their tracks when pinching. They don't give that feeling of fast sailing when pinched because all of the false signs of a pinched monohull are missing - high heel, water in the face and over the decks, heavy rudder, etc. Much more so than with a monohull, it is very easy to tell when a catamaran is making its best VMG.

Of course, all of this depends on the catamaran staying right side up. I've learned on Sailnet that this is really a challenge for them. Most flip inside of breakwaters in conditions the Opti's are having fun in, after all.

Mark


----------



## colemj

OK, I just watched the video, and it isn't a very good one. The point I made about tacking wasn't discussed, which is the really big difference between sailing a catamaran and a monohull upwind.

Instead, the video mostly talked about things like adjusting the jib cars for good jib shape, and trimming the main and jib properly, and to each other. These are the same for any sloop rigged boat of any persuasion, but they tried to make it particular to catamarans.

And Irens made the general statement that a catamaran does not perform as well as a mono upwind, without qualifying it in any way. Refer to my post above on my view. I promise that the Leopard 48 they were sailing will whip an Island Packet 48 upwind. However, a Benetaeu 50 will outperform a Lagoon 50 upwind. On the other hand, an Outremer 45 will horizon a Bene 50 upwind.

I like the last bit where the host says that most monohulls will motor upwind with only the jib out because it is easy to just roll out a bit of jib to gain some more speed. He then asks Irens if a catamaran can do the same...

Mark


----------



## outbound

Been on races to Bermuda on a CW one off tri and had a friend who owns a multihull dealership so have cruised Farrier tri. If upwind performance is the issue tris give nothing away. For a production issue think the Rapido 60 performance is massive.
Think much of what’s said in this diatribe is overstated. Cruise on a mono it’s pretty rare you get to 20o and rarer you get past that. Flat is fast and mostly when cruising you’re mom and pop so not pushing it. Living on a slant turns out to be no biggie. Even on a passage.
Multis can be uncomfortable as well. They’re not imperious to snap roll even in light air and can hobbyhorse.
All this bit about safety is a wash. There are good and bad seaboats in both genera.


----------



## colemj

What "diatribe" are you talking about? Something way back in the thread?

Living on a slant IS a biggie for a lot of people. It is hard to even argue differently given the many threads on forums from frightened or uncomfortable spouses, as well as the stated reasons people give for buying and chartering catamarans over monohulls. I'm not sure how you keep your boat flat upwind or in large following seas, but you may be unique in your ability to do so.

I spent most of my life living on a slant in monohulls, and the past 15yrs living level on a catamaran (with all the "snap rolls" and "hobby-horsing"). There is a large difference both underway and at anchor - in essence, all the time. Again, I've spent many years actually cruising both types. What one prefers is personal, but there is a meaningful and absolute difference.

Seriously, we don't put anything away when we head out on passages. Glasses and dishes on the table, shells, glass bowls, and knick-knacks on ledges, anything lying out while at anchor is left were it was put, etc. Everything stored in cupboards are stored loose like at home - all ceramic and glass dishes, cups, etc. Wine and liquor is stored in lockers without bubble wrap or individual bottle protection or cutouts. Countless times monohull people ask us how long it takes to store everything away and get it back out again - and they never believe that we don't go through that routine. 

Mark


----------



## outbound

Guess we are different. At anchor, in the home ,regardless of where we are there’s a place for everything and everything in its place. Don’t find two sided tape on pictures much of an issue. 
By the way have a lovely drinks locker-no bubble wrap. Put the single malts away as I like to try weird ones and don’t want anyone to drink them. I’ll serve them McClellan 8 or Laiphroag. It’s left in the sink if drinking is done by non sailing guests while moving. Beer stays in the frig. Doesn’t seem to bother people. No nick nacks on the boat either. Like valuables kept in constant humidity/temperature settings. None on the boat. Different strokes for different folks. Will agree serving dinner in a seaway in your foulies gets old fast but that’s rare. 
Agree multis are much more roomy and without significant heel but have watched people punk their guts up on them. Occasion was very light air but swells from one direction and waves from another. Engines were off. Speed a couple of knots at best. Boat a 48.2 or similar I believe. No alcohol involved.
Other occasion was going to north sound. Xmas winds blowing. Contacted another boat that was guesting friends of mine from home. We were to meet at hog heaven for dinner. I watched them hobbyhorse leaving Tortola and while beating to north sound. Don’t know what they were on but it was ~50’. It was Xmas winds in mid 20s true. Apparent wind higher of course in the gusts. Yes we were hard over on 2nd reef in the gusts. We sailed inside the dogs. They went outside. One of my friends reported getting sick. 
Some people are sensitive to high frequency motion and some low frequency. Know people with an iron stomach on sail boats but find cruiseships difficult. Everyone is different. 
Accept there’s no right to this discussion. No better. Different folks...different boats. I’ll tell you my birthday if you’ll give me a Rapido or the big Neel. 
Mark you’ve sailed both. You like so many others have no desire to back to a mono. Great good decision for you. I don’t know if you intend it but you seem to disparage people who for a variety of intelligent reasons have drawn different conclusions. Personally I like both. Don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m just happy to see people cruising not chartering. Don’t much care what they’re on. Rare to see an unpleasant cruiser.


----------



## outbound

Agree when surfing the boat moves around quite a bit and she rolls in seas when the winds on the quarter. Believe that’s true for even some very large monos. Got a tour of a 150’ steel ketch by the owner he said they avoid that point of sail because the boat rolls to much. So agree that’s a fault especially with particular hull forms. Agree it makes doing even simple things difficult. 
But again even with wave piercing bows far reaching in big wind is potentially troublesome for multis as well. My multi friends tell me this is when they’re concerned. It’s a problem monos don’t face as often. With the performance gain of an easily driven hull pitchpoling is in their minds. Getting the big main down seen on current designs may be difficult if not done early. Some forgo the main altogether if there’s a significant probability of that situation arising. But suspect that’s hard on the steering. I talk about wanting to go faster. They talk about going slower. Oh well... 

I’ve never chartered. Can’t speak to that with any personal knowledge. But understand dividing up a cat among multiple families or couples makes wonderful sense. Also understand a loving couple wanting no one else on the boat and a reasonable sized mono being preferred. Different folks...different boats.


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> Where I think the largest misperception occurs is that monohull sailors often associate pinching with performance. They get a tight wind angle with lots of heel and forces and water flying everywhere, and confuse this with good VMG - while laughing at the catamarans who aren't holding the same wind angle.


^^^This! Anyone who has raced monohulls - ESPECIALLY cruising monohulls - knows that these are the boats that you don't have to worry about. They're "sailing hard" and going nowhere.

You also learn very quickly how poorly most monohull sailors tack. The low windage and high momentum (and point of rotation and lots of other technical stuff I don't understand) of the mono will pull you through horrible tacks - yet you'll stop dead in the water afterward while everyone else who knows how to keep speed through their tacks is passing you.

As for the video - c'mon give me some slack here ya picky bastard! It's one of the few good ones I could find!

My favorite part is this...










Look at the direction his hair blowing. If the best a big, clumsy charter cat like this can do is 60° off the wind and still struggle to make way - why is is hair blowing straight back? While they are fighting weather helm? Upwind?

Heh-heh.


----------



## colemj

I don't know why several people here keep putting words in my mouth and twisting everything I say to fit their cross purposes. Please show me where I disparage people who have drawn any conclusions based on real experience and facts.

You seemed to portray a post of mine as a diatribe. It wasn't any such thing, so I thought maybe you were responding to something very early in the thread. It appears you actually do think I was giving a diatribe. Maybe that word doesn't mean what you think it means?

You stated that living on a slant is "no biggie", and I simply responded that it is to many people. I didn't disparage anyone who likes it this way - I only corrected your statement from experience and facts drawn from other's statements in other threads.

You made claims of "snap rolls" and "hobby-horsing" in catamarans, and I gave my experience of sailing and living on ours. I even specifically stated that the preference is personal, but the difference is real.

I try to respond to things on Sailnet based on experience and learned facts, but keep coming against people whose experience in areas are they once sailed a F27 tri, or knew a friend on a catamaran that had a certain experience that is colored to all catamarans all the time, or knows someone building a multimillion dollar high tech multi, etc. 

I'm specifically pointing at you here in this thread with examples, but this is a rampant general issue throughout Sailnet, so don't take it personally or uniquely. I've stopped much of my posting on Sailnet because there is a set of characters here with little experience giving awful advice who will just jump ugly if I try to give an OP different advice on how to do something correctly from years of experience doing exactly what posters are asking about. They will twist words and intentionally mis-characterize postings they want to disagree with until it is such a pig-fest that nobody wants to look anymore. I give them the benefit of the doubt and think they are intentionally being thick and ignorant, because I'd be embarrassed for them if it was otherwise. I don't include you in this last bit - I find your thought processes unclear and tangled, but not intentionally or aggressive. Yours is just a style I can't penetrate well.

Anyway, back on topic - people puke their guts out standing on a floating dock. But somehow when one does so on a catamaran that can't be remembered clearly, at a time that is a bit hazy, in calm, oily, and heaving conditions, it means that puking is a standard feature of catamarans? Or even a common one?

I don't care what people sail, nor how or when they do it. I do expect to be able to answer questions with factual statements, and present real long-term experience to points brought up specifically in a multihull thread without being labeled and the words twisted.

If anything, you go out of your way, and into murky reason and logic, to reinforce to yourself and others that catamarans are full of weaknesses. All while waving the peace flag of "it's all cool, man". 

Instead, I suggest you respond to any differences with a more concise listing of a point followed by a logical thought, opinion, fact, or experience. Then we would be sure we aren't discussing cross-purpose to each other. It would also help others to understand the base underneath each of our arguments.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> I don't care what people sail, nor how or when they do it. I do expect to be able to answer questions with factual statements, and present real long-term experience to points brought up specifically in a multihull thread without being labeled and the words twisted.


I certainly hope you stick around, Mark. Good lord - where else am I going to learn about freakin' multis if not from you, smj, and a couple of others around here who actually know something about them????

This place is definitely ridiculous and exhausting at times - no question. But hang in there for those of us who actually want to learn something!


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> If the best a big, clumsy charter cat like this can do is 60° off the wind and still struggle to make way - why is is hair blowing straight back? While they are fighting weather helm? Upwind?


Many of the current crop of "charter cats" are actually quite good sailing boats. That Leopard 48 in the video is a Morelli-Melvin design that Leopard spent a lot of effort to build well and light. While it looks like a big box on pontoons, it actually has a long waterline, high hull L/B ratio, long runout, and little rocker. It is equipped with a generous sailplan that can actually be trimmed decently.

FP is doing similar things now with their designs, and their build has always been relatively light and competitive. Lagoon crapped the bed a couple of generations ago. Catana's attempt with the Bali is just awful, but their regular line is the same as always. Nautitech is having a good go with the Open models.

But people gotta hate, and hating on "charter cat" performance with no real experience or knowledge is how we do things here.

BTW, keep in mind that these charter cats have cheap charter sails, which makes any performance at all even more impressive.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

So charter cats are the Hunter of the multi world? Is that what you're saying?

I guess I'll have to buy a charter cat then - to maintain my Smack cred.


----------



## TakeFive

smackdaddy said:


> ...You also learn very quickly how poorly most monohull sailors tack...


BS. You have not facts to back this up. It's condescending stuff like this that gets you a reputation as a troublemaker.


----------



## smackdaddy

TakeFive said:


> BS. You have not facts to back this up. It's condescending stuff like this that gets you a reputation as a troublemaker.


Dude, please - I have *plenty* of facts to back it up! 3 years of doing horrible tacks on a C27, 4 years of learning how to do them better while racing/delivering various other monos inshore and offshore, and 3 years of improving even more as I cruised our Hunter. And I'm STILL not that awesome at it (even after winning races)! *Especially* on our beach cat!

So, to thoroughly BS your cry of BS - here is the first photo I ever posted on SN - trying to learn what you're supposed to do with sails on our new to us C27 at the time...










I was pretty damn proud of pulling off the mythical wing-on-wing.

And how about this nicely trimmed main?










Yep. I did that.

And I got absolutely *HAMMERED* here for disrespecting our dear sport with such a pathetic show. But did I cry about it? Hell no. I was a newb. *So I learned*...while hammering those doing the hammering right back.

I learned about a cunningham, and an outhaul, and what the vang actually does, and how that differs from what the mainsheet does, and how crappy the sails on our boat actually were...all kinds of great stuff!

And that's just me. Have you ever raced in a fleet of over 200 boats of all kinds - and watched the performance curve? Sure - none as bad as my own beginning efforts above, but still some spectacularly crappy sail handling.

So, I've got *plenty* of facts to back it up. Maybe you're a pro at tacking and nail it every time. If so, you're one of the few.

As Mark said, there is definitely a group of you guys who like to twist things always toward the negative and stir the pot. You guys really should lighten up a bit.


----------



## TakeFive

Your sample size consists of one very poor sailor (you), yet you choose to insult >50% of monohull sailors:



> ...You also learn very quickly how poorly most monohull sailors tack...


I still call BS, of the inflammatory type.

By the way, take a lousy sailor and put him on a multihull, and you still have a lousy sailor. New clubs won't fix your lousy golf game either.


----------



## outbound

Mark it’s unfortunate you became self referenced when reading my post. The diatribe refers to both sides of this discussion.
The view of tacking of tacking surprises me. Believe many off shore transits (not near shore within a 100m of a coast) require very few if any tacks. Have gone to Bermuda or back from leewards with the mast on one side of the boat the whole time. If you’re going upwind on a beat for hundreds of miles I’m not going to crew for you. 
More typical is reaching or running 60 to 160o. Pointing ability is nice and sometimes the difference between sailing and motoring but most will try to plan to not be on a beat for days on end. Trim is something you fool with out of boredom. Let’s try more sail but a lot of vang and out haul. Now let’s try less vang and a bunch of twist. We commonly have a bit of competition between watches to see who made the most miles. I will impose if I see wrinkles I don’t like or any fluttering but otherwise let them have at it. Even if tacking is necessary it’s done at change of watch. I think this bit about pointing and tacking is a bit overblown by both sides. Upwind a well sailed modern hi-tech mono will probably do a bit better. This is more then compensated by a similar multi probably doing better on more common points of sail. A tri maybe the best of both worlds but likely will pay for it by having less useable interior space. Nothing is perfect. Different folks different boats.


----------



## outbound

Be real interested in hearing about the pluses/minuses of daggerboards v fixed keel on cats from those who have long term experience. Boats we’ve been interested in have mostly been daggerboarders. Or thoughts about rotating masts. Or which platform (mono/multi) is best suited for foil assisting or wing masts.


----------



## Arcb

This discussion about mono sailors being bad at tacking is truly bizzarre. Mono hull sailors and multi hull sailors are the same people on different boats at different times.

An experienced sailor can generally transition between different hull types and sizes fairly seemlessly as well as different rig types fairly seemlessly.

Sure, we all have our strengths and weakness's based on experience and preference, but I think most of us can manage various types of multi hulls, various types of mono hulls and various rigs.


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> This discussion about mono sailors being bad at tacking is truly bizzarre.


The discussion about upwind performance hasn't been about mono/cat sailors, but the boats themselves (in general terms). The only time the sailors themselves came into the discussion was in the light of pinched monohull boats "feel" like they are sailing good tight wind angles when they are actually making poor VMG, while a catamaran doesn't allow this at all. This comes down to the sailors themselves, and is predominantly a monohull thing because a catamaran simply doesn't pinch like a monohull - it stops dead. So a cat sailor will be much less likely to be lulled into thinking they are tacking well because the boat just refuses to let them get to that point.

Mark


----------



## outbound

Mark as you know I’ve limited experience with cats so would asked a question given all this talk about upwind performance.
What I’ve seen is given the performance of cats as you move faster the apparent wind moves forward. Let’s say your destination puts the true wind at a beam reach when you start. You put up all the rags and accelerate. Pretty soon the apparent is at 45 and you’re overpowered. So you reef and trim. You continue to accelerate and reef and trim some more. You’re still in double digits. Now the wind builds. You’re already fully reefed and close hauled. What do you do? Change course? Drop a sail entirely? Which one? Why? Is there a point of limited return for the cruising sailor where the increased performance of modern go fast cats isn’t worth it as for typical cruising it isn’t utilized?


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> Mark it's unfortunate you became self referenced when reading my post. The diatribe refers to both sides of this discussion.
> The view of tacking of tacking surprises me. Believe many off shore transits (not near shore within a 100m of a coast) require very few if any tacks. Have gone to Bermuda or back from leewards with the mast on one side of the boat the whole time. If you're going upwind on a beat for hundreds of miles I'm not going to crew for you.
> More typical is reaching or running 60 to 160o. Pointing ability is nice and sometimes the difference between sailing and motoring but most will try to plan to not be on a beat for days on end. Trim is something you fool with out of boredom. Let's try more sail but a lot of vang and out haul. Now let's try less vang and a bunch of twist. We commonly have a bit of competition between watches to see who made the most miles. I will impose if I see wrinkles I don't like or any fluttering but otherwise let them have at it. Even if tacking is necessary it's done at change of watch. I think this bit about pointing and tacking is a bit overblown by both sides. Upwind a well sailed modern hi-tech mono will probably do a bit better. This is more then compensated by a similar multi probably doing better on more common points of sail. A tri maybe the best of both worlds but likely will pay for it by having less useable interior space. Nothing is perfect. Different folks different boats.


I agree with you on the need for tacking ability when making passages. I put the focus on this in a cruising boat down to the inexperience of those bleating on about it. However, it is always nice to have good upwind performance, and sometimes multi-day passages straight upwind are unavoidable. We did 8 days Panama to Florida straight upwind and against the current and would have taken any additional pointing we could have got. But these types of passages are rare indeed.

Being sailboats, it is also nice to have good upwind performance just because. However, this is often readily tossed aside by most cruising boats in trade for comfort and space and other amenities.

Which brings me back to my point that most cruising monohulls are not out-performing cruising catamarans to windward. It is just one of those red-herring, red-meat, dog-whistle topics mostly by those who do not do a lot of cruising.

If one was racing or day-sailing, one would chose different boats - mono or cat - and upwind performance would play a larger role in the decision. But then the argument would be a J-boat vs. Farr, etc.

Mark


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> Mark as you know I've limited experience with cats so would asked a question given all this talk about upwind performance.
> What I've seen is given the performance of cats as you move faster the apparent wind moves forward. Let's say your destination puts the true wind at a beam reach when you start. You put up all the rags and accelerate. Pretty soon the apparent is at 45 and you're overpowered. So you reef and trim. You continue to accelerate and reef and trim some more. You're still in double digits. Now the wind builds. You're already fully reefed and close hauled. What do you do? Change course? Drop a sail entirely? Which one? Why? Is there a point of limited return for the cruising sailor where the increased performance of modern go fast cats isn't worth it as for typical cruising it isn't utilized?


Most of this is no different than with a mono. First, let's get something straight - we aren't an easy double digit catamaran, and double digits are rare for us!

The progression you describe above is rarely how things work. Yes, the apparent wind moves forward and its speed increases as the boat speed increases, but very, very few catamarans - even performance ones - reach speeds where this goes on very long. Reefing works like on monohulls - it either slows the boat down, matches the wind, or eases the pressure.

Performance cruising catamarans are rarely driven to their speed potential in heavy winds. Ultimate speed isn't what makes them performance cruising catamarans. Instead, a performance cruising catamaran will do better overall speeds than others, but more importantly, they will sail well in lighter air. This is where the performance is utilized. So think of them as wind speed boats up to 10kts or so, then a 10-13kt boat after that, as the boat is reefed for conditions and settled for comfort.

But that isn't really any different from any monohull - where the crew adapts the boat to the conditions rather than absolute performance.

Mark


----------



## Arcb

smackdaddy said:


> You also learn very quickly how poorly most monohull sailors tack.





colemj said:


> The discussion about upwind performance hasn't been about mono/cat sailors, but the boats themselves (in general terms). The only time the sailors themselves came into the discussion


I disagree Mark, SD took a swat at Mono hull sailors in the above quoted post.

I learned to sail on dinghies, but I had a stretch where I sailed almost exlusively traditionally rigged monos. 1992-1993 sailed as volunteer crew on a 72 ft brigantine, 1994 sailed as paid crew on a 110 ft topsail schooner, 1995 sailed as volunteer crew on a 189 ft Brig, over the next 20 years made brief appearances as either professional or volunteer temporary skipper or mate aboard various schooners and brigantines. I assure you, none of those mono hulls came through irons as easily as a modern cruising cat.

So I am calling BS on the blanket statement that mono sailors tack poorly. This isn't a statement that you made, I didn't intend to catch you up in it. As far as I know, you can sail pretty much whatever boat is put under your feet.


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> Be real interested in hearing about the pluses/minuses of daggerboards v fixed keel on cats from those who have long term experience. Boats we've been interested in have mostly been daggerboarders. Or thoughts about rotating masts. Or which platform (mono/multi) is best suited for foil assisting or wing masts.


Somewhere in here this has been discussed, with references to studies done by a couple of designers who have designed identical boats except for the keel appendages.

The plusses of daggers are better upwind performance in light airs, and a small increase (2-5*) in pointing ability overall. I don't give much credence to the point about downwind performance due to less surface area when the boards are up, because most cruising boats will leave some board down just to protect the drive and rudder. This amount of board is about equal to a minikeel drag. I also have experience sailing downwind with similar sized board boats, and they were not faster. They did whip us upwind and in lighter air, though.

The minuses about daggers are they can break, they require another set of activity underway, they require maintenance, and they can rattle in the trunks at anchor. This last point is easily taken care of with wedges.

The first point about them breaking may be significant. I have recently been poking around some of the owner's groups of board boats, as well as reading some blogs, and looking at listings, and have been surprised at the number of them that have broken and replaced boards - some several times.

This may not be surprising when I think back to the number of times we have clipped something with our minikeel hard enough to remove paint and chip the gelcoat. I can assume something like this may break a board. If so, then it happens about every 4-5yrs or so.

IMO, rotating masts are a real pain on a cruising boat. I can't think of a single positive about one.

As for foiling, that is for the marketing people. I can't even imagine a foiling cruising mono, and don't think foiling cruising catamarans are practical. If you are talking solely about a racing boat, or performance day sailor, then that is different.

Mark


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> I disagree Mark, SD took a swat at Mono hull sailors in the above quoted post.
> 
> I learned to sail on dinghies, but I had a stretch where I sailed almost exlusively traditionally rigged monos. 1992-1993 sailed as volunteer crew on a 72 ft brigantine, 1994 sailed as paid crew on a 110 ft topsail schooner, 1995 sailed as volunteer crew on a 189 ft Brig, over the next 20 years made brief appearances as either professional or volunteer temporary skipper or mate aboard various schooners and brigantines. I assure you, none of those mono hulls came through irons as easily as a modern cruising cat.
> 
> So I am calling BS on the blanket statement that mono sailors tack poorly. This isn't a statement that you made, I didn't intend to catch you up in it. As far as I know, you can sail pretty much whatever boat is put under your feet.


Well, I did say similar things. The reality is that I see a lot of mono sailors pinching high and thinking they are doing good. I bet if you look back in this forum, you will find many instances of people claiming they sail to 25* AWA and tack under 90*, etc, without any mention of VMG. Even in the contemporary threads here, claims are being made about poor tacking angles of catamarans without regard to what are good angles in similar cruising monohulls. I tried to put some relativeness in it by bringing up some common cruising monohulls in comparison, but nobody wanted to talk about that.

So the reality is that many mono sailors sail upwind poorly while thinking they are doing well. Many cat sailors would also be in this category, except their boats stop them dead in the water when they try to sail upwind poorly.

So cruising catamaran sailors are saved from this fate by their boats, but they must suffer ridicule from cruising monohull sailors whose boats allow them to sail poorly upwind.

Mark


----------



## Arcb

colemj said:


> So cruising catamaran sailors are saved from this fate by their boats, but they must suffer ridicule from cruising monohull sailors whose boats allow them to sail poorly upwind.


There are no shortage of crappy sailors with either type of boat. There are also no shortage of good sailors with both types of boats.

My current mono is a gaff cat, not exactly an upwind legend, but I don't have any trouble tacking it what so ever. Yes it would stall if I tacked it badly. The brigs and brigantines listed above would sure as hell stall if tacked badly. Its not a mono hull sailor vs cat sailor thing, some folks just have differing levels of sailing ability, no point in blaming it on their equipment.


----------



## colemj

Arcb said:


> There are no shortage of crappy sailors with either type of boat. There are also no shortage of good sailors with both types of boats.
> 
> My current mono is a gaff cat, not exactly an upwind legend, but I don't have any trouble tacking it what so ever. Yes it would stall if I tacked it badly. The brigs and brigantines listed above would sure as hell stall if tacked badly. Its not a mono hull sailor vs cat sailor thing, some folks just have differing levels of sailing ability, no point in blaming it on their equipment.


I wasn't blaming it on their equipment, I was just pointing out that their equipment may be hiding their ability level from them. You pretty much said the same for the boats you sail - if you don't sail them well, they let you know. Likewise most catamarans.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

Wow.

What I meant to say is that all monohull sailors are just dandy. They are all people *with feelings* who do everything they do to the best of their abilities...including superb tacking.


----------



## smackdaddy

In seriousness, I don't know how many of you guys have actually raced boats before, but many - if not most - close races are won or lost on the upwind leg. Tacking is obviously a critical part of that. And doing it very well, maintaining speed and good VMG, is very difficult to do consistently.

I regret that my statement that "most monohull sailors" tack poorly hurt people's feelings. I suppose I should have separated racers from cruisers with that statement.

As a monohull sailor who did quite a few offshore races with inshore upwind starts...after LOTS of practice as a team, I/we tacked better than most in our fleets which gave us better starts on those races. And we were given awards for that - when not everyone got one. I now understand we shouldn't have accepted those.

Even so, I still don't think I/we tack nearly as well as, say, the VOR racers on their in-ports. And I'm okay with that. It doesn't hurt my feelings.

I'm sure each and every monohull sailor above will easily beat me on an upwind run. I hope that helps.

Now - back to multihulls - one shouldn't blame the boat for one's inability to sail upwind. I'm still learning how to *do it well* on our beachcat. It's not nearly as easy as it was on our C27. And I'm pretty sure it's not FIASCO's fault.


----------



## Arcb

smackdaddy said:


> Wow.
> 
> What I meant to say is that all monohull sailors are just dandy. They are all people *with feelings* who do everything they do to the best of their abilities...including superb tacking.


What I am saying, is the sailor isn't defined by the type of boat he owns. It's irrelevant, it's a red herring.

I thought you would understand this as the Captain and owner of a spirit 17. Interesting that you think the sailors ability should be defined by the type of boat they own.


----------



## smackdaddy

Arcb said:


> What I am saying, is the sailor isn't defined by the type of boat he owns. It's irrelevant, it's a red herring.
> 
> I thought you would understand this as the Captain and owner of a spirit 17. Interesting that you think the sailors ability should be defined by the type of boat they own.


Arc, I know you and a few other like to stir up fights - but I honestly have no idea the point you're trying to make here.

Here's the deal. It was said in one of these multi threads recently something to the effect that a "professional racer" who had sailed multis his whole life lamented the fact that he couldn't tack a multi through 120°. This is without doubt blaming the boat...a multi. And it is completely wrong on almost every level I can think of. And not one mono sailor here challenged that assertion.

So, instead of getting into a fight about it, I simply posted a video here showing a charter cat getting some impressive speed upwind while being helmed/crewed by plump old dudes...not merely struggling to make way 60° off that wind.

And it has been said _ad infinitum_ on this and most other sailing forums that cats are "poor upwind peformers". A blanket statement. That is a fact...though I'm sure some will argue otherwise because it's what they do.

So, again, I don't know what you're wanting to fight about here. I think you've summed it up very nicely...



Arcb said:


> ...some folks just have differing levels of sailing ability, no point in blaming it on their equipment.


That's what I was saying.

Sincerely,

The Captain and owner of a spirit 17 (what are you implying there BTW?)


----------



## Arcb

I'm not implying anything. You own a small inexpensive trailer sailer just like me.

I am proud of mine, as I am sure you are of yours


----------



## smackdaddy

Arcb said:


> I'm not implying anything. You own a small inexpensive trailer sailer just like me.
> 
> I am proud of mine, as I am sure you are of yours


Ah, I see. Well, I usually don't point out the size and cost of people's actual boats as any kind of differentiator in these sailing discussions.

I love boats of all kinds. And we're all sailors.

I'm sorry I presumed anything other than complete innocence.


----------



## Minnewaska

A critical and incorrect comment is made about most mono sailors. Then the apology for it comes with a snarky attitude about hurt feelings and an accusation that someone else is starting a fight. 

This will never change.


----------



## outbound

Mark we maybe saying the same thing in different ways but would note the fair number of daggerboard cats successfully cruised. Agree you tend to see a spare board secured on deck. As you know inspite of the focus here on extreme weather light air is overwhelmingly more common when cruising.
In the last few years been seeing and increasing number of rotating masts on cruising boats. Not just Chris White Atlantics mastfoils. A number of NZ one offs hang in my winter cruising grounds. Over drinks other than needing to go to the foot of the mast to reef those folks report no issues. The increase in performance can’t be denied. 
Similarly many modern multis sail day and night in double digits. In the above scenario have seen people either drop the headsail and under trim the main, drop the main (thinking its harder to get down in a hurry if things continue to build), go to the rotating mast alone, go dww or at least downwind to slow the boat and sort themselves out. I’m personally aware of several cruising multis were the owners tell me regardless of twa just about every sail is a beat.
Foils on a hinge located at the toenail are now offered on monos. Foils are part of the design of the rudder(s) of some production multis such as the Rapido.
If I hear you right this level of multi hull performance in a cruising boat maybe excessive. Still it fascinates me as someone who celebrates a 200m day to think about routine 300m -400m days.


----------



## colemj

For sure, lots of dagger cats cruising - I didn't mean to imply differently. Breaking a board is no different than breaking anything else on a boat; it happens once in a while. I've never seen a boat cruising with a spare board and don't see the need. After all, like many things on catamarans there are two of them, and the boat sails just fine with one board. I think Kurt Hughes even designs his boats with a single board. 

Rotating masts only increase performance if the boat is designed for performance and kept scrupulously light. Few cruising boats fit this unless they are large ones. The disadvantage for cruising is more complicated rigging and difficulty with wind instruments and other mast head stuff.

I've never seen a foiling monohull out cruising and can't see how bolting a foil to a toe rail will accomplish this. Even if possible, I don't see foiling boats as practical cruising boats. Weeds, logs, bad seas, etc. Not to mention trying to fix them outside of tech places. The only foiling catamaran touted as a cruising boat flipped over while sailing in protected water. 

Mark


----------



## outbound

I’ll try to find a link if I get a chance while waiting for paint and varnish to dry. But it’s pretty clever. L shaped foiled hinged were they cross the toerail and placed about midship. Open ocean they rotate down and provide upward lift as well as prevent falling to leeward. Where there might be debris, or docked or not necessary they rotate up to be over the deck and house but under the boom. There are videos of actual boats utilizing this technology. Standard shoal draft keels are used to generate a good Gz curve. Clever.
Guess it depends on what you think is large as regards rotating masts. See them on boats 45’ and above.
The weight thing is true for both mono and multi and motor. Load up a Pogo or Artnautica 58 or cf one off mono or multi you are defeating the NAs intentions. The result is in spite of the obvious possibilities of greater performance for multis in practice over long cruises it’s not that great. 
Mr. Perry can be paraphrased as saying displacement means load carrying capability with less performance penalty but light is fast. This is an issue for performance multis when program is cruising and supports the view enhanced performance has penalties for a cruiser.


----------



## smackdaddy

I take it all back...this guy is a rockstar...






On this topic of sailing upwind and tacking, even with our crappy, bagged-out, unshapable sails on that C27, we got pretty good at sailing upwind (note the windex)...










Is this just pinching? Well it can be a fine line. One of our proudest accomplishments on that lake was beating a Beneteau 345 upwind (friendly race) back to the marina. Talking at the dock he was blown away that a C27 could sail that tight and fast - especially with crappy sails. I assured him it wasn't the equipment. Heh-heh.

Even though the usual group above are trying to paint my comment as another "attack" of some sort (a seriously tiresome game) - my point remains that most leisure sailors cannot sail upwind or tack very well - certainly not compared to racing sailors (the example in that 120° story I mentioned). That's just the truth. Over the years of racing we got pretty good at it - but I still don't consider myself great...despite the pickle dishes. It's a serious art...and those pickle dishes were mostly offshore regattas with a lot of cruising boats...not hardcore racers.

Try roll tacking a 420. Oh, sorry, that's for the cannabis thread.

I have no doubt I'm going to have a huge learning curve for getting good upwind performance and solid tacks out of our cruising multi when the time comes. But I also have no doubt that with practice I'll get pretty good at it (if I care enough to try that hard) - and will very likely be able to out-sail many, if not most cruising monos upwind. Our little beach cat is teaching us a lot in that regard. Kinda like that 420.

I already know for sure I couldn't beat FIASCO! back to the marina in our B345-crushing-C27 on this same lake. And that's saying something.

In the mean time, I encourage everyone that was offended above to post photos or videos of their upwind sailing and tacking to show me how it's done. I'm always eager to learn.


----------



## colemj

outbound said:


> Guess it depends on what you think is large as regards rotating masts. See them on boats 45' and above.
> .


What I meant was that a cruising boat that wants to carry significant weight of amenities and such must be large enough to do so and still benefit from a rotating mast. Any size boat kept light and to spec will benefit from a rotating mast, but few smaller ones will be able to carry much weight and still benefit.

I still maintain a RM does not provide a significant advantage in overall cruising and passage making. Upwind in lighter air is where almost all of the advantage of a RM lies, and this is not a typical point of sail for a cruising boat. Once reefed or off wind, the advantages are mostly gone.

For example, we spend months at a time in the Caribbean with at least one reef in our sail, and almost all reaching.

And I still don't see the practicality of cruising a foil boat as you describe. It would be something exactly opposite of what I would want to deal with while cruising.

I suppose a cruising style of spending a few months a year in the eastern Caribbean or Mediterranean mostly day sailing would make these things appealing, but full-time cruising in more remote areas with them give me pause.

I am not disparaging the above style - we know lots of people and friends who do this type of cruising.

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

When it comes time to purchase our cat, I will intentionally avoid rotating masts. They just make no sense on a cruising boat as far as I'm concerned...adding liability for no real return.

And as for foils on monos - the whole thing just seems absurd to me, *especially* for cruising boats. I might change my mind at the next AC, but for now it's the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen...










But hey, no heel. The wives will love them.


----------



## colemj

smackdaddy said:


> - and will very likely be able to out-sail many, if not most cruising monos upwind.


If you are talking about the individual sailors on those monohulls, then I will leave you to that discussion.

If you are talking about the boat ability itself, then you will need to more precisely define that.

Your Helia 44 (say) will beat an Island Packet 44 (say), but not a Bene 45.

And if there is a heavy seas or high short chop, you probably won't be beating many monohulls.

But I understand your underlying point. I attempted to get this thread to define monohulls when discussing performances instead of simply starting the debate by characterising monohulls in general as the performance standard.

It seems like that is the turd on the floor everyone refuses to acknowledge.

The truth is that a very large number of cruising monohulls out here start out as poorer performance designs, and are further made worse with large arches, solar panels, rails filled with fuel jugs, big Bimini shades, older sails, etc. Even more performance oriented ones are brought to mediocre by the desires of practicality and comfort.

And practicality and comfort does become paramount for a significant number of longer term cruisers. This is where most catamarans start with an advantage.

Full disclosure: we are a very overloaded catamaran and our performance suffers greatly from when we weren't. We do live comfortably and still make decent passage times (we plan for 6kts, and usually average 6.5-7.5 on passages - if we were within manufacture loaded displacement specs we would average 8-9kts).

Mark


----------



## smackdaddy

colemj said:


> But I understand your underlying point. I attempted to get this thread to define monohulls when discussing performances instead of simply starting the debate by characterising monohulls in general as the performance standard.
> 
> It seems like that is the turd on the floor everyone refuses to acknowledge.


That's why I always try to use a qualifier like "most". It's the over-generalizations in these discussions that really make it impossible to prove anything empirically.

I remember in one of these multi threads, maybe this one, that someone ironically accused "multihull sailors of being very sensitive/defensive", etc. because you were trying to explain why many of these generalizations didn't hold water. That kind of thing is the turd on the floor as far as I'm concerned.

I've been a mono sailor since the beginning. I have nothing against monos. But I won't buy another one. And I'll be looking for that B45. I think I can take him.

Farewell.


----------



## chef2sail

colemj said:


> If you are talking about the individual sailors on those monohulls, then I will leave you to that discussion.
> 
> If you are talking about the boat ability itself, then you will need to more precisely define that.
> 
> Your Helia 44 (say) will beat an Island Packet 44 (say), but not a Bene 45.
> 
> And if there is a heavy seas or high short chop, you probably won't be beating many monohulls.
> 
> But I understand your underlying point. I attempted to get this thread to define monohulls when discussing performances instead of simply starting the debate by characterising monohulls in general as the performance standard.
> 
> It seems like that is the turd on the floor everyone refuses to acknowledge.
> 
> The truth is that a very large number of cruising monohulls out here start out as poorer performance designs, and are further made worse with large arches, solar panels, rails filled with fuel jugs, big Bimini shades, older sails, etc. Even more performance oriented ones are brought to mediocre by the desires of practicality and comfort.
> 
> And practicality and comfort does become paramount for a significant number of longer term cruisers. This is where most catamarans start with an advantage.
> 
> Full disclosure: we are a very overloaded catamaran and our performance suffers greatly from when we weren't. We do live comfortably and still make decent passage times (we plan for 6kts, and usually average 6.5-7.5 on passages - if we were within manufacture loaded displacement specs we would average 8-9kts).
> 
> Mark


I agree.

Even amongst mono owners you have great divisions between performance boats like C&C . and boats who sell to a condominium crowd like Hunter.

If this thread is only about cruisers like you are there is the niche where the catamarans May make inroads,. If the thread is about charter boats, certainly we see the catamarans as viable as people like the comfort spread out view . If the thread is about your 3very day weekender sailor catamarans have a disadvantage because of cost, dockage costs, and other factors.

It depends on your purpose for a boat. While build quality is great on Island Packets, they suck big time going to windward. Conmfort on the hook unbeatable. Most posters on SN are not cruisers , most are mono owners come up through the ranks,

To each his own...the only time I saw pushback on 5nis thread was when preposterous overstatement about either mono or catamarans are made . Personally I don't think cats by nature are more dangerous, however if I had to survive a lRge wind sea event and had to choose between a 44 Hylas and a catamRan off similar size I would prefer the 17,000 of lead 5 feet below me.


----------



## SanderO

chef2sail said:


> I agree.
> 
> Even amongst mono owners you have great divisions between performance boats like C&C . and boats who sell to a condominium crowd like Hunter.
> 
> If this thread is only about cruisers like you are there is the niche where the catamarans May make inroads,. If the thread is about charter boats, certainly we see the catamarans as viable as people like the comfort spread out view . If the thread is about your 3very day weekender sailor catamarans have a disadvantage because of cost, dockage costs, and other factors.
> 
> It depends on your purpose for a boat. While build quality is great on Island Packets, they suck big time going to windward. Conmfort on the hook unbeatable. Most posters on SN are not cruisers , most are mono owners come up through the ranks,
> 
> To each his own...the only time I saw pushback on 5nis thread was when preposterous overstatement about either mono or catamarans are made . Personally I don't think cats by nature are more dangerous, however if I had to survive a lRge wind sea event and had to choose between a 44 Hylas and a catamRan off similar size I would prefer the 17,000 of lead 5 feet below me.


This really hits the nail on the head. Thanks. So much of the discussion boils down to each person's individual circumstances, preferences and needs.

Almost all these sorts of decisions involves compromises and trade offs... such as windward ability and comfort... For example, Shiva has high freeboard... it gives us the advantages of a flush deck and 6'+ head room below. But we pay a price in windage and she yaws about on the hook. To me this is an OK compromise.... most of the time the winds are not a freeboard issue. We avoid passages to windward... or doing them when the wind it well forward of the beam. We wait or go with lighter wind... We don't have a schedule and can do that... or just pick a destination which gives us fairer winds. Of course we get "stuck" and have to sail to windward and will at times use the iron genny to point higher and make more VMG to our destination.

Designs like boats and cars are compromises which prioritize various aspects. Sure some designs do this better than others. Some solutions are historically proven as successful. And that is what interesting design features are about.


----------



## jtsailjt

smackdaddy said:


> In seriousness, I don't know how many of you guys have actually raced boats before, but many - if not most - close races are won or lost on the upwind leg. Tacking is obviously a critical part of that. And doing it very well, maintaining speed and good VMG, is very difficult to do consistently.
> 
> I regret that my statement that "most monohull sailors" tack poorly hurt people's feelings. I suppose I should have separated racers from cruisers with that statement.
> 
> As a monohull sailor who did quite a few offshore races with inshore upwind starts...after LOTS of practice as a team, I/we tacked better than most in our fleets which gave us better starts on those races. And we were given awards for that - when not everyone got one. I now understand we shouldn't have accepted those.
> 
> Even so, I still don't think I/we tack nearly as well as, say, the VOR racers on their in-ports. And I'm okay with that. It doesn't hurt my feelings.
> 
> I'm sure each and every monohull sailor above will easily beat me on an upwind run. I hope that helps.
> 
> Now - back to multihulls - one shouldn't blame the boat for one's inability to sail upwind. I'm still learning how to *do it well* on our beachcat. It's not nearly as easy as it was on our C27. And I'm pretty sure it's not FIASCO's fault.


Carrying speed and good VMG through a tack is more difficult on some boats than others but that doesn't mean that those who sail boats that tack very easily are lesser sailors than those who sail boats that are difficult to tack. They are doing what is necessary to tack their boat well and whether or not that same technique would also work well on a cat means next to nothing. The important thing is to sail the particular boat you are aboard at the time as well as possible and that means learning all its idiosyncracies and adapting your sailing style to them and that takes awhile for all of us. Once you actually own and sail a cruising cat regularly that process will begin for you and THEN you'll be qualified to expound on mono sailors vs cat sailors and what each group is doing wrong, but hopefully by that time your broadened perspective will make doing that seem less attractive to you than it apparently is at this time. After all, miracles do happen.....


----------



## bluewaterliveaboard

colemj said:


> They are another step up in fit and finish and gear than the Helia, if not two steps, and they are bespoke made, so don't have volume economies. I doubt they build more than 2 a year. They also have a cult following, which helps support the price.
> 
> They are an old design, and pretty well superseded now. I've never seen one floating on its design waterline because the hull shape does not carry weight well. However, we are in a glass house in this regard...
> 
> Mark


I don't understand. What specifically about the Antares hull shape doesn't carry weight well? Don't all cats suffer from weight challenges?


----------



## colemj

bluewaterliveaboard said:


> I don't understand. What specifically about the Antares hull shape doesn't carry weight well? Don't all cats suffer from weight challenges?


They have narrow hulls with little flare. This is a good thing for performance - as long as you can keep the boat very light. Otherwise, performance suffers faster and greater than a less-performance oriented boat with the same payload because the drag increases at a greater rate.

Compare the hull widths and shapes of the Antares and Helia.

There is a calculation called pounds per inch immersion (PPI), which tells you how many pounds of added weight will sink the boat one inch on waterline. A rough guess would have the Antares at 900-1,100 PPI, and the Helia at 2,400-3,200 PPI. So 1,000 pounds added to the Antares will sink it 1", but 1,000 pounds will have almost imperceptible effect on the Helia.

Yes, all cats suffer from weight challenges (all monos do to, but not to the same extent). The difference among cats is just how much they suffer, and this is seen in the examples here.

Mark


----------



## colemj

It's also more than just the shape of the sterns. The Antares hull shape overall is pretty old with fat wide bow entry and deep almost c-shaped hull sections. Compare to a performance-oriented Outremer 45 with finer bows and wider sterns with circular sections.

All designs are compromises. The Antares is more palatial than the Outremer. However, designs of performance-comfort boat markets like the Antares was aimed at have advanced considerably since the Antares was designed.

Mark


----------

