On Monday 24 May 2004 5:36 am in rec.boats.cruising Roy Jose Lorr wrote:



Chris Newport wrote:

On Sunday 23 May 2004 2:38 pm in rec.boats.cruising Roy Jose Lorr wrote:



Chris Newport wrote:

On Thursday 20 May 2004 12:15 pm in rec.boats.cruising Jeff Morris
wrote:

Poor, poor jaxie. Your post reeks of jealousy.

You still haven't given even a single example of a cruising cat
problem.

Just plonk the troll into your killfile, he is terminally clueless.
The existance of a few bad small cats is enough to condemn all
multihulls in his tiny mind despite the existance of cats which are
unconditionally stable.

"Unconditionally stable" is a term recognized
in maritime parlance as hyperbole.

Only by those who fail to understand the designs involved.
There are, of course, some deliberate design choices such as
a relatively short mast and sails which are calibrated to offload
dangerously high forces before the craft is in danger.

"Unconditional" is an absolute. No matter the design there
are always conditions such as in the ones you set up as
"deliberate design choices" (above).

Pedants R us.
The stability is unconditional for the yacht as designed (Wharram).

Changing the design obviously invalidates the stability.
The designs in question have, amongst other features, a short mast to
keep the centre of effort low, and special sails calibrated to
cut loose before critical loading can be reached.

The JaxIdiot will probably continue his rants, but bigotry is no
substitute for reality. Just keep him in your killfile.
Feeding the trolls is a bad idea.