"sherwindu" wrote in message
...
One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat
capsizes? There
is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even
sailed on a cat
myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort
advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a
kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be
heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than
another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in
short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify
this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there
probably is some
effect on a close hauled tack.

Sherwin D.

wrote:

So why do people buy cruising catamarans if monohulls in
the same price range are just as spacious and can go just
as fast ?

1. Shallower draft
2. They can be parked on the beach
3. They don't sink as easily
4. They don't roll like monohulls
5. ???

"Bryan" wrote:
We raced our Schock 35 for many years and often there
was a multihull fleet sailing the same course. F-28 Corsair
Trimarans and others of the same ilk. We were very rarely
beaten around the course by those multihulls.. I would
tend to agree that in general a large monohull will be as
fast if not faster than a cruising cat.

Ask yourself this question... Would you rather be upright on the bottom or
upside down and floating on the surface?

Some people don't like the way multis ride in heavy seas.. other do.

Ask yourself another question.. What is easier on the crew for days on end..
living on the walls of a monohull or not heeling more than 10 degrees?

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

"sherwindu" wrote in message
...
One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat
capsizes? There
is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even
sailed on a cat
myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort
advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a
kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be
heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than
another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in
short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify
this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there
probably is some
effect on a close hauled tack.

Sherwin D.

There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually
with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats
reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this
never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees.
Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls
being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel
angles can be 30 degrees side to side.

Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower
but much more amplitude on a mono.
Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass
never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the
motion.

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

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

Peter HK

On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 23:06:50 GMT, wrote:


So why do people buy cruising catamarans if monohulls in
the same price range are just as spacious and can go just
as fast ?


I have a friend who has just completed a circumnavigation with his
family in a 45' cat.

His logic for choosing it was:

1. Stable platform for his wife to teach the kids their school lessons
and to live in.
2. Room to carry full set of electrical gear to make life homely -
i.e. generator, water maker, washing machine, massive cold store.
3. Speed so he could sail out of the way of bad weather. He reckons
that only once in 6 years did a mono match his performance and it was
a big fast one that could point better than him beating up the Red Sea
and although he was faster through the water he couldn't point as high
and so they ended up with similar trip times point to point.

He also commented that the ride was 'hard' and that some sailers who
were used to monos found it very uncomfortable.

One downside for them was that if they wanted to haul it out they
needed to find a yard with a massive lift which limited their haul out
options.

If you're staying in marinas lots of them will charge you more for a
cat than for the equivalnet length mono.

He reckons the shallow draft was never relevant.

I'm buying a mono though as they are boat-for-boat cheaper.

Mike

Peter HK wrote:


"sherwindu" wrote in message
...
One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat
capsizes? There
is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even
sailed on a cat
myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort
advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a
kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be
heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than
another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in
short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify
this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there
probably is some
effect on a close hauled tack.

Sherwin D.

There are occasional sea patterns that are uncomfortable on a multi, usually
with beam seas, but the magnitude of the event needs to be considered. Cats
reach max stability at about 5 degrees of heel (when a hull lifts). As this
never happens on cruising cats, all heel angles are less than 5 degrees.
Short sharp waves can occasionally exceed this a little due to the hulls
being in a trough and crest. Compare to a mono rolling downwind where heel
angles can be 30 degrees side to side.

Multis do have a different motion- shorter and sharper compared to slower
but much more amplitude on a mono.
Personally I find it quite comfortable. As stated in a previous post a glass
never spills, which is a significant observation on the severity of the
motion.

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

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

Peter HK

I guess most people prefer to be upside-down-but-floating compared to
upright-on-the-bottom of the Atlantic. The next question though, is what are
chances of such events to happen? When I cross the Atlantic (or whatever
waters) I rather opt for a 1% chance to sink my monohull (and trust on my
liferaft) than a 20% chance of capsizing my cat. Now, both figures are probably
far from accurate, so my question is, what are chances that such things will
happen?

Regards,
Marc
www.marineyacht.com

sherwindu wrote:
One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat
capsizes?

Since it appears to be "common knowledge" that cruising cats capsize
frequently, perhaps you can give us a few examples.

The truth is, it is a very uncommon event. I've only heard of a half
dozen in the last 20 years, and half of those were delivery crews or
racers, carrying too much sail. In fact, none happened when laying to
a sea anchor. As someone else mentioned, fatalities are extremely
rare. I might guess that more cruising fatalities are from falling
overboard than from sinking or capsizing. This would imply that the
more stable platform is safer.

There
is no natural righting moment, as with a mono hull. I have never even
sailed on a cat
myself, but the heeling of a mono hull seems to offer some comfort
advantages, because the combination of sails and pendulum keel act as a
kind of 'shock absorber' in wavy conditions. I would prefer to be
heeled over and on a steady lean than bounced up and down as one than
another hull is lifted and dropped by a wave, especially in
short choppy seas. Long rolling waves would probably somewhat nullify
this advantage. I am referring more to waves on the beam, but there
probably is some
effect on a close hauled tack.

There is no doubt that some people don't like the motion of a cat. A
short, steep chop on the beam can be particularly annoying. The
biggest problem I have is that I end up handsteering in these cases,
because a firm hand on the wheel can make the ride dramatically
smoother.

One significant point in these cases is that we're often doing 9 or 10
knots. When I've had a rough ride on a monohull we're often doing
half that speed.

sherwindu wrote:
One question nobody has addressed yet is what happens when a cat
capsizes?


Oh c'mon, surely somebody has addressed that point?


Jeff wrote:
Since it appears to be "common knowledge" that cruising cats capsize
frequently, perhaps you can give us a few examples.

The truth is, it is a very uncommon event.

About as uncommon as monohulls rolling & sinking?


.... I've only heard of a half
dozen in the last 20 years, and half of those were delivery crews or
racers, carrying too much sail. In fact, none happened when laying to a
sea anchor. As someone else mentioned, fatalities are extremely rare.

And usually more related to hypothermia or trauma than
drowning. Still, morbid fear of dying is as unhealthy as any
other neurosis... you can lock yourself in a nice safe
padded room for decades and you'll still die... so you might
as well go & do something interesting!

I might guess that more cruising fatalities are from falling overboard
than from sinking or capsizing. This would imply that the more stable
platform is safer.


Good point, I wonder how the man overboard statistics
compare between mono- & multi-hulls.


There is no doubt that some people don't like the motion of a cat.

I don't my self... and BTW I have know cruising cats that
would spill a drink, contrary to claims that it never
happens. But of course, much much less frequently than on
monohulls.


... A
short, steep chop on the beam can be particularly annoying. The biggest
problem I have is that I end up handsteering in these cases, because a
firm hand on the wheel can make the ride dramatically smoother.

One significant point in these cases is that we're often doing 9 or 10
knots. When I've had a rough ride on a monohull we're often doing half
that speed.

That's because you're on the wrong monohull.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've sailed two cats,
a Gemini and PDQ 36. In both cases my wife and I were bored to tears.
The PDQ was fast off the wind and there was some novelty in that for a
few minutes, but it didn't last. The heeling and motion of a monohul is
part of the romance of sailing for many of us. It feels right, even if
our drinks spill. I think the fellow who posted that while they are
both wind powered, they are too different to truly conpare. No doubt if
I was planning extended cruises with little chance of day and night
sails, a Cat might be the better pick. But for the way most folks sail,
with many daysails and long weekends a mono will be a lot more fun.
Then again, the novelty of heeling and having an exciting ride with the
rail buried can also lose it's charm. My wife and I plan to buy a
larger boat for part-time liveaboard in about 4-5 years and we'll look
at cats again, but I expect we've been spoiled to want the fun factor
more. Maybe our aging bones will change all of that! I do agree that
cats are not attractive, and I'm still young enough (no offense meant
here!) to place that high on my list, though I own a "modern" looking
boat she's still pleasing to my eye.

RB
Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html
NY

On 12 Jan 2006 06:54:22 -0800, "Capt. Rob" wrote:

I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself.

I find it refreshing that there's been nothing but good, factual
information here instead of the usual bunfights. A part of that is
that this particular newsgroup is (generally) civil, but another part
is that catamarans have evolved and matured not only as a "technology"
but as an aesthetic choice (never to be sneered at...look at great but
homely cars that don't sell).

Cats are here to stay, and while I question their suitability for
*all* sailing endeavours, they have in some respects many clear
advantages that appeal to a lot of people. Were you to cruise solely
the South Pacific or the Caribbean, for instance, I think the shallow
draft and downwind performance of cats makes them a logical, and in
some cases, nearly inevitable choice.

I am quite willing these days to state that my reluctance to consider
a cat for self-sufficient world-cruising/liveaboard/ocean
passagemaking has much more to do with my own ignorance and the
still-excessive price premium of cats than of any perception I hold on
their suitability as passagemakers. I do dislike many of the design
choices of cats in terms of "floating condos" with "patio doors",
etc., but many builders and designers are preserving the "cat logic"
and advantages but are keeping the windage down and beefing up the
general seaworthiness of cruising cats.

So while I am tilting toward the known...a 40-45 foot monohull
cruiser...I haven't ruled out buying a cat. I would like to sail one,
though. Despite having PDQ Yachts just down the road, seeing a
cruising cat on Lake Ontario is very rare (Hobies, sure...) and I have
never sailed one, or even been aboard one, nor is there one at my
club, although we've had large cruising cats visit on occasion.
Strangely, there's quite a few trimarans...I see a few F-27s and F-28s
and a good pal just bought a Hobie TriFoiler "for kicks".

I don't know if the paucity of catamarans has to do with price (old,
smallish monos are a steal here currently), conservatism or the
peculiarly short, steep chop you find frequently in Lake Ontario, and
which would perhaps wobble a cat on the beam, but I hope to sail one
at some point, just to see what all the fuss is about.

R.

Bob is absolutely right. If your love of boating is based primarily
on the rush of sailing rail down, and your annual cruise is a weekend
at the marina across the bay, then a cruising cat is not for you.

Ironically, Bob imagines a time in the future when a cat might be the
best match for his needs. I've said that my next sailboat will
probably be a small overnighter, perhaps 22 feet. Right now we're
between long cruises but still spend about 6 weeks each summer aboard,
so the cat still serves our needs.

Capt. Rob wrote:
I find it interesting that this ultimately pragmatic thread has not
touched on the actual sailing experience itself. I've sailed two cats,
a Gemini and PDQ 36. In both cases my wife and I were bored to tears.
The PDQ was fast off the wind and there was some novelty in that for a
few minutes, but it didn't last. The heeling and motion of a monohul is
part of the romance of sailing for many of us. It feels right, even if
our drinks spill. I think the fellow who posted that while they are
both wind powered, they are too different to truly conpare. No doubt if
I was planning extended cruises with little chance of day and night
sails, a Cat might be the better pick. But for the way most folks sail,
with many daysails and long weekends a mono will be a lot more fun.
Then again, the novelty of heeling and having an exciting ride with the
rail buried can also lose it's charm. My wife and I plan to buy a
larger boat for part-time liveaboard in about 4-5 years and we'll look
at cats again, but I expect we've been spoiled to want the fun factor
more. Maybe our aging bones will change all of that! I do agree that
cats are not attractive, and I'm still young enough (no offense meant
here!) to place that high on my list, though I own a "modern" looking
boat she's still pleasing to my eye.

RB
Beneteau First 35s5 http://hometown.aol.com/bobsprit/index.html
NY

DSK wrote:
....
Jeff wrote:

Since it appears to be "common knowledge" that cruising cats capsize
frequently, perhaps you can give us a few examples.

The truth is, it is a very uncommon event.


About as uncommon as monohulls rolling & sinking?

I've often wondered about this - some writers simply hand wave that the
chances are roughly equal. My vote would be for avoiding the situation.



However, you have to add to the monohull side of the ledger the number
of sinkings from other causes.

....

I might guess that more cruising fatalities are from falling overboard
than from sinking or capsizing. This would imply that the more stable
platform is safer.


Good point, I wonder how the man overboard statistics compare between
mono- & multi-hulls.

I know of one well publicized case of a racer falling through the
netting.
....