In article ,
sherwindu wrote:


"Capt. JG" wrote:


But your making all sorts of assumptions about monos! On the one had, you're
making the assumption of a freak wave with no preparation or warning - on
the other, you're assuming that all the hatches, etc. on the mono are closed
and ready for battle. You can't have your cake and eat it too.


My point is that if you close your hatches and prepare your boat properly,
you have a good chance of coming through a bad storm. Naturally, if you
don't, you decrease your chances of keeping the boat afloat.

But, what I'm saying is that you're ignoring the same advice that
would apply with a mutli. For example, if you make sure you're
prepared for the worst, then you have a good chance of coming through
a bad storm on either type of vessel.

Actually, they decrease, since you won't be out as long as with a mono. Now,
if you want to argue that way, you could say that SINCE multis go faster,
then people would be tempted to select smaller weather windows, and thus
open themselves up to greater danger. :-)

What I meant was that any boat is exposed more to bad weather possibilities
on a long voyage. Actually you can get stung on shorter hops. I left Key

Hurricanes don't just appear out of nowwhere... they're quite
predictable in the general sense. Sounds like bad planning.

OK. What do you do if your multihull does flip over? I hear about crawling
into one of the watertight compartments, but I wonder about the practicality of
this, and where do you go from there?

Fair enough question. You have food, water, dry clothes, batteries. You have
access to the topside (bottom of boat) through hatches built for that
purpose. You have an Eprib, which you use. You have filed a sail plan
with friends, so they'll know when to start putting out the
alarm. While you wait for rescue, you relax because you're not in a
washing machine going round and round. You're in a stable (though
upside down) boat.. actually more stable than right side up. You're
fine.

You don't need to crawl into a watertight compartment, because those
compartments are sealed. You just stay in the inverted living area.

Please describe your offshore, extreme weather sailing on a mono that causes
you to have these views!

You can find some of them in my recent posts to this thread. I have no first
hand
experience sailing multihulls, but am basing my thoughts on how sailboat
behave,
in general, and what I know about Fluid Mechanics, Stability, etc., from an
engineering point of view.

Since you have no first had experience with multis, then I submit that
you're not qualified to say that they are dangerous. For example, if I
have an advanced degree in business, that doesn't qualify me to claim
that a McDonald's franchise is a bad deal because I've never tried
fast food. :-)




--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

On 18 Jan 2006 11:10:52 -0800, lid (Jonathan Ganz)
wrote:

For example, if I
have an advanced degree in business, that doesn't qualify me to claim
that a McDonald's franchise is a bad deal because I've never tried
fast food. :-)

But it does qualify you do do a business analysis using the facts that
are available.

In article ,
Wayne.B wrote:
On 18 Jan 2006 11:10:52 -0800, lid (Jonathan Ganz)
wrote:

For example, if I
have an advanced degree in business, that doesn't qualify me to claim
that a McDonald's franchise is a bad deal because I've never tried
fast food. :-)

But it does qualify you do do a business analysis using the facts that
are available.

Correct. So far, I haven't seen such an analysis from Sher... just
opinion based on facts like him having never actually cruised on a
multi. :-)





--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

I have sailed a Phillip Rhodes designed Swiftsure 33 mono for 23 years
in the Gulf of Mexico. I have also, during the last 15 years chartered
cats from 39, 42, 44, 47 and 48 feet in the Caribbean. I have also
sailed two cats in the Bahamas. It is my opinion that a cruising cat is
by far the more comfortable boat on any long distance voyages,
especially off the wind. When comparing sinking monos to capsizing
cruising (not high tech racing) cats, there is a slight advantage to
the cats. The fatality rates are slightly better on cruising cats. All
French made cats are required by law to have escape hatches. If it
wasn't a law, there would be far fewer on the boats. So the presence
of these safety devices are not, by their presence, an indication that
cruising cats are flipping over everywhere. It has been my experience
that sailing either a mono or a cat in the same heavy weather
conditions does not hold a greater degree of danger for either. There
is just a difference in the tactics one employs to handle like
conditions. As you stated, the right boat will just jump out at you.
What jumped out to me was a 45 ft cruising cat that I will sail in the
Med this summer and cross to the Caribbean next December. You really
have to sail any type of boat fairly extensively to make a
determination as to what suits you best. My opinion is if you can
afford it, buy a cat.

I have sailed a Phillip Rhodes designed Swiftsure 33 mono for 23 years
in the Gulf of Mexico. I have also, during the last 15 years chartered
cats from 39, 42, 44, 47 and 48 feet in the Caribbean. I have also
sailed two cats in the Bahamas. It is my opinion that a cruising cat is
by far the more comfortable boat on any long distance voyages,
especially off the wind. When comparing sinking monos to capsizing
cruising (not high tech racing) cats, there is a slight advantage to
the cats. The fatality rates are slightly better on cruising cats. All
French made cats are required by law to have escape hatches. If it
wasn't a law, there would be far fewer on the boats. So the presence
of these safety devices are not, by their presence, an indication that
cruising cats are flipping over everywhere. It has been my experience
that sailing either a mono or a cat in the same heavy weather
conditions does not hold a greater degree of danger for either. There
is just a difference in the tactics one employs to handle like
conditions. As you stated, the right boat will just jump out at you.
What jumped out to me was a 45 ft cruising cat that I will sail in the
Med this summer and cross to the Caribbean next December. You really
have to sail any type of boat fairly extensively to make a
determination as to what suits you best. My opinion is if you can
afford it, buy a cat.

Ian George wrote:

The first rule of multihull sailing is 'If you
cannot reef quickly and easily, don't go to sea'.

I think that is true for any sailboat. The question is not always
having the knowledge of how to reef, but having the opportunity
to do so. I can think of several scenarios where the crew is
distracted by something and doesn't reef down in time.

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.

I think you are trying to give some credit to multi-hull sailors over
mono hull sailors where it doesn't exist. What you describe is just
plain good sailing technique, for any boat. However, as I stated earlier,
a boat heeling over is a much more positive feedback than an increase
of speed. A monohull will usually do a gradual heeling or at least it is
obvious that you may be in trouble if your rail is in the water. A multihull,
on the other hand, will probably stay flat until the tipping force overcomes
the moment arm of the upwind pontoon, and the multi will go over rather
quickly. I'm curious what criteria a multi sailor uses to relate boat speed
to the amount of reefing required. Speed is not that easy to judge, and a
dangerous speed may be dependent on the particular construction of the multi.




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.

My issue is not so much preventing the initial roll over, but what happens
to the boat once that happens. Not that it is exactly pertinent to multihulls,
but the news today talked about two women rowing their boat across the
Atlantic and having it flip over. Luckily, they had an EPIRB, called for
help, and luckily their was a Tall Ship in the vicinity that picked them up
rather quickly as they clung to their overturned hull.





Offshore to me is 200miles.

I don't know if that is enough of a cushion if the seaworthyness of any
boat is in question.

"MB" wrote:
...
When comparing sinking monos to capsizing cruising
(not high tech racing) cats, there is a slight advantage to
the cats. The fatality rates are slightly better on cruising
cats...

So there's no point arguing which is safer.

As you stated, the right boat will just jump out at you.
What jumped out to me was a 45 ft cruising cat that
I will sail in the Med this summer and cross to the
Caribbean next December.
...

At first I was looking at a Tayana, then a Beneteau 473
jumped out at me, then a Catalina, a Jeanneau and now
a Fountaine Pajot !

Just thought I would mention a couple of boats which could be
interesting for someone trying to choose: The Etap from Belgium is an
unsinkable monohull with a foam-filled double hull (Demonstrated by
opening the sea cocks and sailing it across the Channel), and the
Dragonfly from Denmark is a collapsible trimaran, you can fold the
outriggers close to the main hull to take up less space in port.

PH When a multi capsizes it floats- most are now equipped with hatches to enter
PH a secure part of the hull in a capsize. When a mono sinks however- dragged
PH down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a
PH liferaft.

PH It depends on what you think is the most basic safety feature-
PH nonsinkability or self righting.

PH Peter HK



--
You cannot consistently believe this sentence

sherwindu wrote:
Ian George wrote:

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.

I think you are trying to give some credit to multi-hull sailors
over mono hull sailors where it doesn't exist. What you describe
is just plain good sailing technique, for any boat. However, as I
stated earlier, a boat heeling over is a much more positive
feedback than an increase of speed. A monohull will usually do a
gradual heeling or at least it is obvious that you may be in
trouble if your rail is in the water. A multihull, on the other
hand, will probably stay flat until the tipping force overcomes the
moment arm of the upwind pontoon, and the multi will go over rather
quickly. I'm curious what criteria a multi sailor uses to relate
boat speed to the amount of reefing required. Speed is not that
easy to judge, and a dangerous speed may be dependent on the
particular construction of the multi.



Not so much in a cruising multi; in a highly strung racing multi very close
attention needs to be paid to true -v- apparent wind, but as close atention
to velocity made good is also important when racing, usually there is close
attention being paid to that formula.

In a cruising cat or tri, it is usually sufficient to be aware of apparent
wind when running off the wind, where one could be doing 15 knots or better,
running off a 25knot breeze, in the apparent calm of a mild 10kt apparent
wind in the cockpit. Trousers can be ruptured when turning to head back up
and the wind turns into 30 - 40kts apparent... drogue time, hopefully you
aren't out of sea room.


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.

My issue is not so much preventing the initial roll over, but what
happens to the boat once that happens. Not that it is exactly
pertinent to multihulls, but the news today talked about two women
rowing their boat across the Atlantic and having it flip over.
Luckily, they had an EPIRB, called for help, and luckily their was
a Tall Ship in the vicinity that picked them up rather quickly as
they clung to their overturned hull.

Rolling a modern, well-found cruising multi is very, very hard to do. That
was all I was trying to point out. Older (up to th '70s) solid deck tris and
cats were somewhat more prone to this, due to the action of green water on a
solid expanse of deck. Some coastal cats and tri's I see with close weave
tramp mesh bother me too, although the chances are that the tramps would be
ripped from their saddles before the boat would roll. but really, the OP
wasn't talking about these boats.

Frankly taking to the Ocean in a rowboat isn't even halfway sane.


Offshore to me is 200miles.

I don't know if that is enough of a cushion if the seaworthyness of
any boat is in question.

If the seaworthiness of the boat or for that matter the competence of the
people aboard it is in question, I am perfectly happy to watch it leave from
the dock, and have done.

Ian

"sherwindu" wrote in message
...


Ian George wrote:

The first rule of multihull sailing is 'If you
cannot reef quickly and easily, don't go to sea'.

I think that is true for any sailboat. The question is not always
having the knowledge of how to reef, but having the opportunity
to do so. I can think of several scenarios where the crew is
distracted by something and doesn't reef down in time.

The same bad things can happen on a mono if you don't do what's required to
be safe. Your comments don't really add much to why or why not a multihull
is or isn't safe.

I think you are trying to give some credit to multi-hull sailors over
mono hull sailors where it doesn't exist. What you describe is just
plain good sailing technique, for any boat. However, as I stated
earlier,
a boat heeling over is a much more positive feedback than an increase
of speed. A monohull will usually do a gradual heeling or at least it
is
obvious that you may be in trouble if your rail is in the water. A
multihull,

Gradual heeling? Not in high wind gusts. These are common where I sail.
You're doing a nice steady 6/7 kts in 20 kts air, then you get a 32 kts
gust. Even reefed, the boat will heel quite quickly, and I've seen people
dumped into the bottom of the cockpit. And, this is in protected water!

on the other hand, will probably stay flat until the tipping force
overcomes
the moment arm of the upwind pontoon, and the multi will go over rather
quickly. I'm curious what criteria a multi sailor uses to relate boat
speed
to the amount of reefing required. Speed is not that easy to judge, and
a
dangerous speed may be dependent on the particular construction of the
multi.

Probably? It'll happen very quickly. I reef by wind speed or expected wind
speed. That's very easy to judge.

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.

My issue is not so much preventing the initial roll over, but what
happens
to the boat once that happens. Not that it is exactly pertinent to
multihulls,
but the news today talked about two women rowing their boat across the
Atlantic and having it flip over. Luckily, they had an EPIRB, called
for
help, and luckily their was a Tall Ship in the vicinity that picked them
up
rather quickly as they clung to their overturned hull.

I think that if you're a prudent sailor (mono or multi), you'd want to do
all you can on the prevention side. Taking the position that a mono *will*
survive a roll with rigging intact is not a smart move. Further, the broken
mast has a propensity to punch holes in the boat. You would need to get up
on deck and cut it free immediately. This is extemely hazardous duty.

Offshore to me is 200miles.

I don't know if that is enough of a cushion if the seaworthyness of any
boat is in question.

Offshore out here is beyond the demarcation line, the dividing point between
domestic rules-of-the-road (Inland Navigating Rules) and the international
rules-of-the-road. Out here, that is definitely offshore in every sense of
the word, including not being within sight of land.