Why do people buy cruising catamarans ?
			 
			 
			
		
		
		
			
			While reading rec.boats.cruising, I noticed sherwindu 
 felt compelled to write: 
 
 
 
Ian George wrote: 
 
  The truth is that cruising cat or tri 
 capsize is very unusual, and usually requires a combination of crew error 
 (or stupidity, like a recent capsize in Indonesia achieved under screecher 
 in 35+knots) with extreme wind and sea states to achieve. 
 
   I guess you never heard of Murphy's law about things that can go wrong, 
   sometimes do.  For example, in a sudden storm, there may not be enough 
   time to sufficiently shorten sail, or something jams and you can't let the 
   sheets out in time, or the sail jams in the track and can't be shortened, 
   etc.  I'm not saying these are common occurences, but they are not out 
   of the realm of possibility. 
 
Well, I have heard of Murphy, and he's been on my boats, Mono and 
Multi - fact remains that these circumstances are equally applicable 
to both types of craft, so I don't think that the outcomes would be 
any more catastrophic. The first rule of multihull sailing is 'If you 
cannot reef quickly and easily, don't go to sea'. In general, apart 
from the nut-swinging hard core racer, a multi will be reefed well 
before a similar sized mono - simply because the multihull sailor 
reefs to gust-speed, whereas the mono sailor will as a rule reef to 
average wind speed and point-up or heel over to spill the gusts. 
 
You seem to not take into consideration the different techniques that 
are applied to competently handling the vessel type. 
 
 
 These comments about monohulls sinking is 
  overstated. Sure they do, but not 
  necesarily because of their basic design.  Catamarans are made of 
  fiberglass, etc., which last I heard 
  is something that is heavier than water and will sink under certain 
  circumstances. 
 
 Cats and Tri's generally won't sink, and I can't think of any that I know of 
 that have; but they can break up, 
 
   Well, that's another concern I would have about seaworthyness of multihulls. 
 
If you hit a container hard enough to rupture a lead-ballasted 
sailboat it will sink. If you hit the same container at the same rate 
in a multihull in may break up, how this reflects on the relative 
merits of the seaworthiness of either boat type baffles me. 
 
 which is their worst outcome and usually 
 results from some sort of 3rd party collision (reef, container, 
 whale/sunfish) to name a few, which is why I carry a liferaft. I read 
 elsewhere in this thread, and know of many other multihull sailors who don't 
 consider the expense and weight of a liferaft justified. I don't understand 
 this rationale when offshore sailing, but each to their own. 
 
   For the same reason that wings break off a plane under extreme wind stress, 
   this failure could happen on a multihull, due to poor design or construction. 
 
 
Poor design and construction on a monohull or a multihull would be a 
problem for me. There are good and bad examples of both. 
 
 
  Reducing sail can 
  decrease the probability of a roll in both monohulls and multihulls. 
  Freak wave action can roll a boat 
  over even with these precautions.  I personally would feel safer and 
  more comfortable in a boat that 
  I know is going to come back up on it's own, with or without it's 
  rigging, than hoping I can get into a 
  watertight compartment with my boat floating upside down. 
 
 Either outcome may be unavoidable, and both outcomes are unsatisfactory. 
 Have you ever been rolled right over in a keelboat? 
 
   Thank goodness, no.  I have managed in big blows to keep the boat under 
   control by heaving to or going to bare poles. 
 
 I'm guessing not, 
 because the one time I was (which was in a harbour, btw) the absolute chaos 
 below from shipped water, fouled supplies, loose equipment, battery acid and 
 the like made it no place to want to be for any period of time. I have never 
 capsized on a cabin-sized multi, and doubt it would be much better inside, 
 although the idea of inflating and securing the liferaft on the inverted 
 hull(s) once the conditions quieten down has some appeal - although I'm not 
 sure how it would work in practice. I suppose it could be allright if one 
 had rigged some points in advance to secure everyhing. 
 
   I don't think discomfort is the issue here, but survival.  Any kind of a 
knockdown 
   or rollover is going to cause havoc on any boat. 
 
 
Ah, that is my point. All of the issues you have raised in this thread 
- bad design, poor seamanship, inappropriate precaution, poor 
construction - all apply equally to both types of craft. They can't 
possibly be used to argue a case for one type over the other. 
 
 
 
  The 
  problem with taking a multihull on an 
  extended voyage, say an ocean crossing, is that the chances of 
  running into real bad weather increase. 
  In the very extreme, one can take down all sails in a monohull, 
  batten down the hatches, put out a sea 
  anchor and ride things out.  If for some reason the boat is rolled 
  over, it will right itself.  Can't say the 
  same thing for a multihull.  Granted this is an extreme case, but if 
  I were planning an ocean crossing, 
  it would certain cross my mind as a possibility. 
 
 The theory of lying to a parachute on a multi is standard heavy-weather 
 practice. I've never heard of one capsizing from this situation. In fact, 
 the multi lying to on a correctly set bridle and parachute is really a 
 pretty comfortable solution when circumstances dictate it. 
 
 Why don't you get out on a cat or tri sometime, and observe the differences 
 for yourself? 
 
    As I stated earlier, I'm sure the multihulls give a comfortable ride in most 
 
    sailing conditions.  The extreme conditions I have been refering to are not 
    the kind I would want to test. 
 
Well, to be perfectly honest, I don't know anyone who actively seeks 
out these conditions :-) 
 
 There are a lot of differences between multis and monos, and 
 mostly they don't bear repeating, having been covered elsewhere in this 
 thread. I sail multis primarily because the cruising grounds in easy reach 
 here are quite shallow and require occasional foray into very shoal waters. 
 Running a deep-draft keelboat would be a pain in the arse, and I don't much 
 care for the performance of shallow-bilged monos. 
 
   Makes sense to me.  In my many cruises to the Bahamas, I occasionally had 
   difficulties with my 4 foot draft finding safe anchorages.  My dinghy allowed 
 
   me to visit any nearby place I wanted to go. 
 
 
 
 I like cats, tris and monos, and can appreciate the relative merits of all 3 
 styles, and personally, I wouldn't hesitate to venture offshore in a well 
 found example of either type. 
 
    Offshore is a general term.  It could mean you are within close proximity to 
a 
    port, if the weather turns very nasty.  Crossing an ocean doesn't give you 
    that option, so you better be sure your boat can take it and leave you in 
    a position where recovery is still within possibility. 
 
Within the capabilities of the craft and its crew. Facing the bleak 
facts, on boats of any configuration, it is frequently the crew that 
fails, long before the well-found vessel will founder. 
 
Offshore to me is 200miles. 
 
Cheers, 
Ian 
		 
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
	 |