* Wilbur Hubbard wrote, On 8/9/2007 7:41 PM:
....

Once again, you've made a fool of yourself, demonstrating that you
have little, if any, knowledge of boats.


Seems to me you are the one who is fond of the COLREG rule that says
something about acting on scanty information being daft???

You're the one making unfounded assumptions.


So why are you making assumptions and acting on scanty information in
this instance? Could it be because you're prejudiced and refuse to
believe catamarans are dangerous to go offshore in because you have one?

And yet, their safety record is as good as monohulls. It would seem
that you're actually reflecting your terror of going offshore.

Refuse to believe they do break and do end up upside-down and do end up
washed up on beaches with the loss of all hands?

As opposed to disappearing without a trace?


The story told about three grown men taking a two-week cruise. I doubt
three men are going to go on a two-week cruise on some glorified Hobie
Cat with two cross-beams and a hammock in between.

What? Now you're denying the obvious by claiming such boats don't
exist. Actually, there are many of that type in Europe - they were
fairly common 20 to 30 years ago. Of course, since you know nothing
of boats your ignorance in this area is understandable.

Here's one that I've been on (OK, I leaned against it):
http://www.wingo.com/sailing/fossett/index.html

Fortunately, the modern cruising cat was developed so that there's a
safe alternative.

Lose your bias and
smell the roses. It was a cruising cat and it fell apart. Believe it!

Right - even though it had "crossbeams" and was a quarter the price of
a modern cat and was too old to insure. And remember, it was
already further offshore than you've ever been.