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.

"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

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

"Marc Onrust" wrote in message
. nl...
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

The only published figure that I have ever seen for risk was in Chris
White's book- The Cruising Multihull. He quotes mortality figures from the
US coastguard over a 10 year period and tries to interpret mono and multi
separately. Thus, while not capsize versus sinking, it was an attempt to
look at overall risk. His estimate is one death per year per 16,500 multis
compared to one per year per 12,500 monos.

He admits the figures are not rock solid.

Overall though it points to very low and equivalent risk in either hullform.

Peter HK

"Marc Onrust" wrote in message
. nl...
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

I don't think I recall hearing about any cruising cats that have capsized.
Where are you getting 20% or even 5%?


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

Capt. JG wrote:

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


I don't think I recall hearing about any cruising cats that have capsized.
Where are you getting 20% or even 5%?

Incidences of cruising cats are pretty infrequent. I only
know of the following;

- PDQ 32 capsizing while entering a cut in the Bahamas while
a "rage" was blowing. Pitchpoled in very shallow water in
the huge breakers

- a Gemini capsizing in Texas; sailed over due to too much sail

- a Fountaine Pajot 35 capsized in the Caribbean; sailed
over with a charter group aboard

- a Catana in the Med; capsized due to a sudden squall
hitting with the chute up at night.

- a Heavenly Twins 26 or 27 capsizing in Force 10+ north of
the British Isles during a rare summer severe storm.

I have also heard of the F-P Maldives 32 being pretty
susceptible to capsize but that's more innuendo that actual
facts and the Iriquois but I don't know if they were
capsized during racing or while cruising.

Most of the above are smaller, narrower beam cats by the way
of fairly old design; the exceptions being the FP 35 and the
Catana.

When the Wolfson Unit of Southhampton University did a study
of trying to capsize cruising cat models the only way they
could do it was a beam on breaking wave beam of the boat
(similar to a monohull by the way)

"MODEL TESTS TO STUDY CAPSIZE AND STABILITY OF SAILING
MULTIHULLS"
Deakin B.
The 15th Chesapeake Sailing Yacht Symposium, January 2001

Evan Gatehouse

Capt. JG wrote:

"Marc Onrust" wrote in message
. nl...
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

I don't think I recall hearing about any cruising cats that have capsized.
Where are you getting 20% or even 5%?


I don't have a clue about those figures, that's why I said they (the figures)
are probably far from accurate. I'm only trying to make clear (like discussed
in the thread above as well) that you can only objectively compare the two
events (sinking a monohull vs. capsizing a cat) if you know what the chances of
both events are. In doing so, I over exaggerated both 1% and 20% figures, just
to make my point clear. I would prefer a cat by the way.

Cheers,
Marc
MarineYacht Yacht Charters

Peter HK wrote:

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.

Monohulls do not normally rock from side to side, nor do they heel over 30
degrees
unless you are racing. With the proper sail trim, they should not heel that
much.
You missed the point of the sails acting like a shock absorber in union with
the'
pendulum action of the keel.



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.

And what if you are on deck at the time? And what do you do in this secure
section of the hull? Wait and hope for rescue because you won't be able to
get yourself out of trouble.

When a mono sinks however- dragged
down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a
liferaft.

Any boat that fills with water is going to sink. The idea about mono hulls
is that
they will right themselves before the boat fills with water.



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

I prefer the self righting. At least I have a chance to recover and continue

sailing, in that case. If it sinks, then the life raft is your backup.



Peter HK

"sherwindu" wrote in message
...


Peter HK wrote:

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.

Monohulls do not normally rock from side to side, nor do they heel over
30
degrees
unless you are racing. With the proper sail trim, they should not heel
that
much.
You missed the point of the sails acting like a shock absorber in union
with
the'
pendulum action of the keel.

You're right, but they can in sudden gusts with a relatively inattentive
cruising crew.

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.

And what if you are on deck at the time? And what do you do in this
secure
section of the hull? Wait and hope for rescue because you won't be
able to
get yourself out of trouble.

Well, the same argument can be made for a mono if you're on deck and she
heels dramatically or takes on water suddenly.

Why would you be unable to get yourself out of trouble if you're fairly
secure in a hull?

When a mono sinks however- dragged
down by that ballast that makes it self-righting- the only hope is a
liferaft.

Any boat that fills with water is going to sink. The idea about mono
hulls
is that
they will right themselves before the boat fills with water.

Not completely true, as most modern cats will not sink. Of course, never is
an absolute, so I suppose it's possible though remotely so.

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

I prefer the self righting. At least I have a chance to recover and
continue

sailing, in that case. If it sinks, then the life raft is your backup.

Many who sail cats don't carry a liferaft, because the cat or tri is the
liferaft.

Now I'm not claiming that a multi is the end all and be all of safety at
sea, but most of the time, the prime consideration is crew durability, not
boat durability. Crews get tired on a boat that's heeled all the time for
long distances. Tired crew make more mistakes.

Well, you're certainly not a licensed captain. I suppose you can call
yourself whatever you want, but the typical definition is licensed by the
USCG or other authority.

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