|
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
"Armond Perretta" wrote in message
... Capt. JG wrote: "Capt. Rob" wrote ... DSK wrote ... BTW if you want to call yourself "Captain" why don't you ... Look up the word Captain, Doug. You might also ask the Coast Guard exactly what a captain is. Here's a hint. It does not have to involve a license. I think plenty of people here know who we are and may even know that you no longer sail and have a trawler, but I won't engage in any nonsense here since this is a real group. You're welcome to fire away....I won't fire back. Have fun. Well, you're certainly not a licensed captain. I suppose you can call yourself whatever you want, but the typical definition of Captain is someone licensed by the USCG or other authority. I certainly agree. Admiral of the Fleet Armond -- Good luck and good sailing. s/v Kerry Deare of Barnegat http://kerrydeare.comcast.net Actually, I just prefer to be called skipper by friends, crew, or customers. :-) -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
DSK wrote:
Evan Gatehouse wrote: ... Incidences of cruising cats are pretty infrequent. I only know of the following; - PDQ 32 capsizing while entering a cut in the Bahamas while a "rage" was blowing. Pitchpoled in very shallow water in the huge breakers Another incident not on the list... 2 ~ 3 years ago a Gemini capsized in the Straights near Seattle. Boat was reportedly being sailed by a novice in squally weather. Jeff wrote: I talked at length to the owner of this boat shortly after the episode. Apparently, the charterer was singlehanding, on autopilot, and down below. He was carrying full sail (one report said one turn on the jib) in 25+ knots, sheeted in tight, while on a beam reach. That's not really good practice, is it? ;) No, but almost all disasters include some degree of human error, otherwise known as incompetence. When considering such events you have to think about what is possible when you screw things up; not what happens when you do everything perfectly. Of course, in this case its possible that a monohull would have lost its rig and have been in equally serious trouble. .... (snip for brevity) ... The combination of narrow beam and tall rig makes this sort of incident inevitable. For this reason, I've usually said that the minimum size for an offshore capable cat is about 35 feet, unless it has a very conservative rig. Have you read Tom F. Jones account of sailing thru an Atlantic hurricane in a 26' (IIRC) Wharram? That was most interesting. I think that cruising can be done in multihulls with a degree of safety depending on the skill & knowledge of the skipper... obviously the more he knows about the characteristics of his specific vessel, the better. I think I read that some time ago. When I wrote "conservative rig" I was thinking of Prouts and especially Warrams. |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ? (OT)
Capt. JG wrote:
"Marc Onrust" wrote in message . nl... Capt. JG wrote: "Marc Onrust" wrote in message . nl... Peter HK wrote: "sherwindu" wrote in message ... One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. Sherwin D. There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees. Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel angles can be 30 degrees side to side. Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower but much more amplitude on a mono. Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the motion. When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter a secure part of the hull in a capsize. When a mono sinks however- dragged down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a liferaft. It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature- nonsinkability or self righting. Peter HK I guess most people prefer to be upside-down-but-floating compared to upright-on-the-bottom of the Atlantic. The next question though, is what are chances of such events to happen? When I cross the Atlantic (or whatever waters) I rather opt for a 1% chance to sink my monohull (and trust on my liferaft) than a 20% chance of capsizing my cat. Now, both figures are probably far from accurate, so my question is, what are chances that such things will happen? Regards, Marc www.marineyacht.com I don't think I recall hearing about any cruising cats that have capsized. Where are you getting 20% or even 5%? I don't have a clue about those figures, that's why I said they (the figures) are probably far from accurate. I'm only trying to make clear (like discussed in the thread above as well) that you can only objectively compare the two events (sinking a monohull vs. capsizing a cat) if you know what the chances of both events are. In doing so, I over exaggerated both 1% and 20% figures, just to make my point clear. I would prefer a cat by the way. Cheers, Marc MarineYacht Yacht Charters I would also if I could afford it... :-) Actually, in the bay, I like the heel of the mono. I'm just not sure I want to do that again for days on end. If I only could go back to "the bay" and SF once more. Been there a few years ago with my wife. What a truly great city!! |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Though slightly "off topic" my post kind of pertains to the
catamaran debate. There is a young couple from Chicago that sold their worldly possesions (including a condo) took a "Sailing 101" course on Lake Michigan then proceeded to purchase a slightly used CharterCats Sa "Wildcat 350" and immediately undertook a circumnavigation of the world out of Florida. This adventure started in September of 2003... and this week they are headed for Sri Lanka via a brief stay in the Similan Islands. Needless to say... they have had their trials and tribulations due to their inexperience as sailors... and with the vessel (S/V Bumfuzzle) itself. But for "the grace of God goes thee" they have made it this far unscathed... although their boat has had to have a lot of work done while enroute. Their web site is: http://www.bumfuzzle.com/ Their log entries are vastly numerous but well written (with photos) and there is one window devoted to their on going dia- logue with the manufacturer... the original surveyor... and subsequent repair yard managers ...that those of you that are technically gifted will find very interesting reading. By the way they love to receive email and are fairly diligent in responding promptly. And yeh... for a lot of you in this group and the other sailing type forums... these folks and their web site are *old news*. But I thought I would still give a "heads up" about a good read for those that may have missed out on the original flourish of postings that took place back a year or so ago. Best regards to all Bill |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
Bryan wrote:
Did a little reading last night about what the designers and builders of multis say. From Morrelli: Crossing the pond 45 foot minimum, excluding the Bay of Biscay, all notorious capes, and staying within 40 North and South. After that add 10-15 foot and you are still marginal for the Capes. The other designers tended to agree with this basic premise. Morrelli designs tend to be aggressive, not conservative, so I'm not surprised that they suggest a larger size. Certainly a huge number of smaller Prouts have crossed oceans and circumnavigated without incident. They built about 4000 cats, most in the 34-37 foot range and they've sailed all over the world without a single capsize. But my friends tell me it takes about 25 knots to get their 37 up to speed. Their boat has made several Atlantic crossings. I would tend to agree with Morrelli although smaller multi's have made passages outside of these parameters. Lucky? This is more of a philosophical question. What probability of success would you consider "nominal"? I don't think I would make a crossing if I thought the disaster rate was 10%, and I'd like to see it well below 1%. But to be considered "really safe" you'd probably want 0.1% or even better. Smaller Benehuntalinas have crossed the pond many times; were they lucky? I'd certainly take a Prout 37 over any of them. Would you cross in a Hunter 36? |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ? (OT)
"Marc Onrust" wrote in message
. nl... Capt. JG wrote: "Marc Onrust" wrote in message . nl... Capt. JG wrote: "Marc Onrust" wrote in message . nl... Peter HK wrote: "sherwindu" wrote in message ... One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. Sherwin D. There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees. Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel angles can be 30 degrees side to side. Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower but much more amplitude on a mono. Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the motion. When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter a secure part of the hull in a capsize. When a mono sinks however- dragged down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a liferaft. It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature- nonsinkability or self righting. Peter HK I guess most people prefer to be upside-down-but-floating compared to upright-on-the-bottom of the Atlantic. The next question though, is what are chances of such events to happen? When I cross the Atlantic (or whatever waters) I rather opt for a 1% chance to sink my monohull (and trust on my liferaft) than a 20% chance of capsizing my cat. Now, both figures are probably far from accurate, so my question is, what are chances that such things will happen? Regards, Marc www.marineyacht.com I don't think I recall hearing about any cruising cats that have capsized. Where are you getting 20% or even 5%? I don't have a clue about those figures, that's why I said they (the figures) are probably far from accurate. I'm only trying to make clear (like discussed in the thread above as well) that you can only objectively compare the two events (sinking a monohull vs. capsizing a cat) if you know what the chances of both events are. In doing so, I over exaggerated both 1% and 20% figures, just to make my point clear. I would prefer a cat by the way. Cheers, Marc MarineYacht Yacht Charters I would also if I could afford it... :-) Actually, in the bay, I like the heel of the mono. I'm just not sure I want to do that again for days on end. If I only could go back to "the bay" and SF once more. Been there a few years ago with my wife. What a truly great city!! Where are you now? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ? (OT)
Capt. JG wrote:
"Marc Onrust" wrote in message . nl... Capt. JG wrote: "Marc Onrust" wrote in message . nl... Capt. JG wrote: "Marc Onrust" wrote in message . nl... Peter HK wrote: "sherwindu" wrote in message ... One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat capsizes? There is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even sailed on a cat myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there probably is some effect on a close hauled tack. Sherwin D. There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees. Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel angles can be 30 degrees side to side. Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower but much more amplitude on a mono. Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the motion. When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter a secure part of the hull in a capsize. When a mono sinks however- dragged down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a liferaft. It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature- nonsinkability or self righting. Peter HK I guess most people prefer to be upside-down-but-floating compared to upright-on-the-bottom of the Atlantic. The next question though, is what are chances of such events to happen? When I cross the Atlantic (or whatever waters) I rather opt for a 1% chance to sink my monohull (and trust on my liferaft) than a 20% chance of capsizing my cat. Now, both figures are probably far from accurate, so my question is, what are chances that such things will happen? Regards, Marc www.marineyacht.com I don't think I recall hearing about any cruising cats that have capsized. Where are you getting 20% or even 5%? I don't have a clue about those figures, that's why I said they (the figures) are probably far from accurate. I'm only trying to make clear (like discussed in the thread above as well) that you can only objectively compare the two events (sinking a monohull vs. capsizing a cat) if you know what the chances of both events are. In doing so, I over exaggerated both 1% and 20% figures, just to make my point clear. I would prefer a cat by the way. Cheers, Marc MarineYacht Yacht Charters I would also if I could afford it... :-) Actually, in the bay, I like the heel of the mono. I'm just not sure I want to do that again for days on end. If I only could go back to "the bay" and SF once more. Been there a few years ago with my wife. What a truly great city!! Where are you now? The Netherlands |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ? (OT)
"Marc Onrust" wrote in message
. nl... I would also if I could afford it... :-) Actually, in the bay, I like the heel of the mono. I'm just not sure I want to do that again for days on end. If I only could go back to "the bay" and SF once more. Been there a few years ago with my wife. What a truly great city!! Where are you now? The Netherlands Ah, I've got some friends over there... near Laren. |
Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
wrote in message
nk.net... wrote: Though slightly "off topic" my post kind of pertains to the catamaran debate. There is a young couple from Chicago that sold their worldly possesions (including a condo) took a "Sailing 101" course on Lake Michigan then proceeded to purchase a slightly used CharterCats Sa "Wildcat 350" and immediately undertook a circumnavigation of the world out of Florida. This adventure started in September of 2003... and this week they are headed for Sri Lanka via a brief stay in the Similan Islands. Needless to say... they have had their trials and tribulations due to their inexperience as sailors... and with the vessel (S/V Bumfuzzle) itself. But for "the grace of God goes thee" they have made it this far unscathed... although their boat has had to have a lot of work done while enroute. Their web site is: http://www.bumfuzzle.com/ From the above web site: "A friend from the U.S. had asked us if we could have a look at a 55 foot monohull that is for sale here. It was kind of fun to poke around on a big monohull, but even at 55 feet I have to say that I am still happier on my 35 foot cat." I'm also considering getting a catamaran but they're difficult to find in California. Huh? Why's that? -- "j" ganz @@ www.sailnow.com |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:51 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com