Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

Really? I've heard of a couple in the last 20 years ... can you point to
any?
This is an odd issue, because people often claim cats flip, sink, or go
missing,
but then are never able to provide examples. There are, of course, a few,
but
very few compared to monohulls

there are thousands of mono's to every two huller out there.

There *IS* a reason for that. In fact, many sound reasons for that.

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

jeffies, speaks from the pulpit of The Church of Enlightenment/Two Hulls
preaching only to the Two Hulls Choir thusly:

Did you even look at the links? One talks about the Iroquois, a very early
design from the '60's, only 30 feet, which did have problems. They also did
a
considerable number of passages, including IIRC a circumnavigation.

The second provides a number of links to mishaps involving a 19 foot cat, a
"Route du Rumb" racer, Groupama, one of the most extreme racing boats ever
made,
a Prindle 18 capsize, a daysailing dive boat in Hawaii, and a fictional
movie.

Another tells the rather improbable third-hand tale of two 42 foot cats
falling
over in an anchorage from a 40 knot gust. (Most modern cats are designed to
stay upright with full sail sheeting tight, with a 45 knot wind on the beam.)

Pretty lame, jaxie. But its about what we expect from you.





"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
BULL****.
Yet another idiot claim from our resident clown.

check it out, yo-yo. catamarans "out there" sink at an unethical rate
as
compared to mono's.

Check what out? Show us a site that proves that cruising cats aren't
safer
than monohulls. Another worthless claim from the jaxhole.


http://www.cs-bb.com/forums/CSBB/index.cgi/read/9154

http://www.cs-bb.com/forums/CSBB/index.cgi/read/9182

http://www.cs-bb.com/forums/CSBB/index.cgi/read/9275

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

"JAXAshby" wrote in message
...
Really? I've heard of a couple in the last 20 years ... can you point to
any?
This is an odd issue, because people often claim cats flip, sink, or go
missing,
but then are never able to provide examples. There are, of course, a few,
but
very few compared to monohulls

there are thousands of mono's to every two huller out there.

There *IS* a reason for that. In fact, many sound reasons for that.

Once again, jax displays his total ignorance. In this country, there are
200,000 boats registered as "auxiliary sailboats." This includes many (probably
a majority) that are under 30 feet, so the number of sailboats that could be
compared to a cruising cat is probably well under 100,000. However, one
catamaran builder alone has built almost 1000 boats, and that number is likely
doubled by the other builders. This by itself is enough to prove that Jax is
off by at least a factor of forty. But looking to Europe we find that Prout
built about 5000 cats. Does that mean that there are 10,000,000 aux sailboats
in England? rather doubtful. Similar numbers have been built by the large
manufacturers in France, and now South Africa is building in large numbers.

Its pretty clear that the number of cats is growing. While I'm not sure the
number is 5% yet, it is getting close. Boston was never considered a catamaran
center, but every marina has at least some - the number is about 3% of the
sailboats. In my marina the number is over 10%!

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

the latest report to the choir from the pastor of The Church of Eternal
Enlightenment/TwoHulls.com is thus:

[yuk]

In this country, there are
200,000 boats registered as "auxiliary sailboats." This includes many
(probably
a majority) that are under 30 feet, so the number of sailboats that could be
compared to a cruising cat is probably well under 100,000. However, one
catamaran builder alone has built almost 1000 boats, and that number is
likely
doubled by the other builders. This by itself is enough to prove that Jax is
off by at least a factor of forty. But looking to Europe we find that Prout
built about 5000 cats. Does that mean that there are 10,000,000 aux
sailboats
in England? rather doubtful. Similar numbers have been built by the large
manufacturers in France, and now South Africa is building in large numbers.

Its pretty clear that the number of cats is growing. While I'm not sure the
number is 5% yet, it is getting close. Boston was never considered a
catamaran
center, but every marina has at least some - the number is about 3% of the
sailboats. In my marina the number is over 10%!

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

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.

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

the existance of cats which are unconditionally
stable.

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


in maritime parlance perhaps, but to the rest of the world it is referred to as
"bullsh*t". Only drivers of training wheels think otherwise.

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

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.

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

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

Only by those who fail to understand the designs involved.

such as design engineers?

unconditionally stable means stable without an condition contradicting it.

Catamarans are usually UNstable in conditions beyond about 30* of heel. In
fact, catamarans are most stable ONLY at zero degrees of heel. Each degree of
heel past zero takes less and less force to push the boat to the next degree of
heel. In addition, as the windward pontoon clears the water the wind force
heeling the boat *increases* due to the end plate effect of the leeward
pontoon.

Both are in dramatic difference to monohulls, which in cruising designs are
more resistent to heel as the boat tilts (up to about 60* generally of heel)
and in which the sail area exposed to the wind decreases.

Catamarans can be capsized by strong winds alone. Monos virtually always
require breaking waves to capsize.

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.

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

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).

Seaworthiness of Mac26
 

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.