boatgeek wrote:



*Speed. Our St Francis will do around 8 knots in 11 knots of wind, at
15 knots of wind we break into double digits.

No arguement there, multis go faster because they are not displacment
hulls.

*Stability. I don't see it actually from a comfort point of view as
much as safety. If the boat doesn't rotate 45 degrees because of
fluke wind shift it means my wife and son don't get thrown around like
rag dolls.

Strong winds do not suddenly shift like that. You can get that in light
airs
and then such an effect is minimal on the boat. Of course, an
accidental
jig could cause some problems, but we won't address that.





*Positive bouyancy.

This could be incorporated into a monohull, if it was a high
priority objective.

. I can stop and launch a
dingy to assist another boat in just 3 or 4 minutes.

I tow my dinghy behind the boat, so launching is not an issue.



*large wide decks.

A possible advantage.



*Shallow draft.

This is a definite advantage for places like the Bahamas.

*Good visibility from inside.

Monohulls have windows, don't they?




*twin short keels. It allows us to "walk" off a beach and easily
kedge ourselves back into the water should we drag onto the shore (ok,
not too proud to admit that). But imagine having dragged anchor in the
middle of the night. In a monohull you'd be woken up by the fact they
you are lying completely on your side with waves threatening to wash
into your cockpit and down the companionway.

On the contrary, you get woken up when your keel starts bumping on the
bottom, and you don't go over, you just sit where you are, aground. You

are in an anchorage where despite strong winds, you should not get
big waves.



*Most catamaran thru hulls are above the waterline. I've seen too
many monohulls sink because a hose fitting for their sinks came loose
during the night. I've also had my hose fittings also come loose on
my galley sink drain, and had to tighten them again. That's it. No
water rushing in, no panics.

This kind of design is not peculiar to multihulls. My monohull has all
it's thru hulls below the water line.

Many monohulls have a dozen or more thru
hulls. I have less than half of their below water thru hulls, and
were a thru hull to come loose, it's not as low in the water because
the water intakes don't have to be extra low to compensate for heeling.

Monohulls do not require more thru hulls than multihulls.


*Capsizing - Some believe that the monohull ability to heel to dump a
gust of wind gives them an advantage because the catamaran can't heel.
True, cat's don't heel. We accelerate.

There is a limit to how fast your catamaran will go. I have seen
pictures
of catamarans with one hull lifted out of the water. A strong enough
wind is going to blow it over.

All else aside, a catamaran has two basic STABLE configurations, upright

and upside down. A monohull has only one STABLE configuration, upright.

That's the way catamarans
have the same "pressure valve" for dumping unexpected gusts, we can't
heel, therefore the force is directed into motion forward. That's the
safety valve.

When your upwind hull comes out of the water, there goes your safety
valve.
Wave action can contribute to this problem. I can judge this problem
easily
on a monohull by the amount of heel. On a catamaran, you have to be a
very
good judge of speed, or otherwise you will have little warning, except
for the
upwind hull coming up, and by then, it may be too late.

I've been in the gulf stream in November, in large
waves and trade winds down in the caribbean, I go fast.

I think you have been very lucky up to now.

While going
fast I can take my time and reef the sails without worrying about
falling over the rails. I think the reason this keeps coming up is
that every serious cruiser in a monohull has had a knock down and that
fear is very present in their minds.

The serious monohull sailors keep their sail plan under control by
reefing,
heaving to, or going bare pole, so most of them don't experience knock
downs.

I've been in the same wind gusts
on a monohull and a catamaran. The monohull was knocked down and then
righted itself, the catamaran just went faster. We do tend to
compensate for this by sailing more by the numbers than a monohull
would (reef at 20 knots, reef again at 30 knots, even if it feels
completely under control).

I hope this helps some who are looking at catamarans. Almost every
reason I have isn't due to convenience, it's due to safety.

I agree that multihulls are great for speed and shallow draft. When it
comes
to safety, I completely dissagree. I would not try any remote offshore
cruising
with a catamaran.

The previous postings about losing the mast are not the
prevalent case. More often, the mast is mostly intact, and sailing can
resume.

Sherwin D.



Cheers,

Doug and Cindy and Zach
St Francis 44
Annapolis, MD

"sherwindu" wrote in message
...
*Stability. I don't see it actually from a comfort point of view as
much as safety. If the boat doesn't rotate 45 degrees because of
fluke wind shift it means my wife and son don't get thrown around like
rag dolls.

Strong winds do not suddenly shift like that. You can get that in light
airs
and then such an effect is minimal on the boat. Of course, an
accidental
jig could cause some problems, but we won't address that.

They do out here. We have a spot on the bay called Hurricane Gulch. Happens
there all the time.

*Positive bouyancy.

This could be incorporated into a monohull, if it was a high
priority objective.

. I can stop and launch a
dingy to assist another boat in just 3 or 4 minutes.

I tow my dinghy behind the boat, so launching is not an issue.

On long distance cruises?? That's fine for a couple of hours, but you can
run into real problems with a dinghy under tow, not to mention slowing the
boat.

*large wide decks.

A possible advantage.

I would say huge advantage. It's much harder to accidentally fall off.

*Shallow draft.

This is a definite advantage for places like the Bahamas.

Or any place you want to get close in.

*Good visibility from inside.

Monohulls have windows, don't they?

Sure, but they aren't panoramic. He said "good visibility." :-)

*twin short keels. It allows us to "walk" off a beach and easily
kedge ourselves back into the water should we drag onto the shore (ok,
not too proud to admit that). But imagine having dragged anchor in the
middle of the night. In a monohull you'd be woken up by the fact they
you are lying completely on your side with waves threatening to wash
into your cockpit and down the companionway.

On the contrary, you get woken up when your keel starts bumping on the
bottom, and you don't go over, you just sit where you are, aground. You

Well, possibly true, but I'd rather deal with the situation in an upright
position than on my ear.

Deliberately running aground is also an option to get a decent night's
sleep. It's not great for the bottom paint, but it's much more of an option.
We had to do that in Belize.. that or sail all night (which the charter
company specifically told us not to do, due to fishing pots and small
fishing boats with no lights).

are in an anchorage where despite strong winds, you should not get
big waves.



*Most catamaran thru hulls are above the waterline. I've seen too
many monohulls sink because a hose fitting for their sinks came loose
during the night. I've also had my hose fittings also come loose on
my galley sink drain, and had to tighten them again. That's it. No
water rushing in, no panics.

This kind of design is not peculiar to multihulls. My monohull has all
it's thru hulls below the water line.

I think that's what he said... :-)

*Capsizing - Some believe that the monohull ability to heel to dump a
gust of wind gives them an advantage because the catamaran can't heel.
True, cat's don't heel. We accelerate.

There is a limit to how fast your catamaran will go. I have seen
pictures
of catamarans with one hull lifted out of the water. A strong enough
wind is going to blow it over.

Of course there are limits. There are also limits to how much pressure your
hatch boards can take when bording water. The point is that instead of
heeling, the multi sails faster.

All else aside, a catamaran has two basic STABLE configurations, upright

and upside down. A monohull has only one STABLE configuration, upright.

Nope. It's got two. Upright on the top and upright on the bottom. :-)

That's the way catamarans
have the same "pressure valve" for dumping unexpected gusts, we can't
heel, therefore the force is directed into motion forward. That's the
safety valve.

When your upwind hull comes out of the water, there goes your safety
valve.
Wave action can contribute to this problem. I can judge this problem
easily
on a monohull by the amount of heel. On a catamaran, you have to be a
very
good judge of speed, or otherwise you will have little warning, except
for the
upwind hull coming up, and by then, it may be too late.

True, especially on crusing cats. However, this an extremely rare occurance
and just a bit of careful thought will prevent it.

I've been in the gulf stream in November, in large
waves and trade winds down in the caribbean, I go fast.

I think you have been very lucky up to now.

I think he's probably very skilled.

While going
fast I can take my time and reef the sails without worrying about
falling over the rails. I think the reason this keeps coming up is
that every serious cruiser in a monohull has had a knock down and that
fear is very present in their minds.

The serious monohull sailors keep their sail plan under control by
reefing,
heaving to, or going bare pole, so most of them don't experience knock
downs.

Absolutely true! ... as should all sailors.

I've been in the same wind gusts
on a monohull and a catamaran. The monohull was knocked down and then
righted itself, the catamaran just went faster. We do tend to
compensate for this by sailing more by the numbers than a monohull
would (reef at 20 knots, reef again at 30 knots, even if it feels
completely under control).

I hope this helps some who are looking at catamarans. Almost every
reason I have isn't due to convenience, it's due to safety.

I agree that multihulls are great for speed and shallow draft. When it
comes
to safety, I completely dissagree. I would not try any remote offshore
cruising
with a catamaran.

You would be in a vocal majority, ill-informed as they are. Many, many
multis have crossed oceans even in terrible conditions and had no problems
at all. Same is true of monos. Both types of vessel can and are seakindly in
extreme conditions. One of the jobs of an experienced skipper is to avoid
extreme conditions.

The previous postings about losing the mast are not the
prevalent case. More often, the mast is mostly intact, and sailing can
resume.

More often? Not sure I agree. If you have sails up and the boat turtles, I
think there's a good probability you're going to lose your rig. All the
time? No. But a significant amount of time to make it common.

Well said, and a great post from boatgeek.

Another important consideration is the effect of heeling and rolling on crew
performance. The U.S. naval study of this by JB Hadler and TH Sarchin (see
The Cruising Multihull by Chris White) found that a sustained 10 degree roll
angle reduced ability to perform routine tasks by as much as 50%!

sherwindu has contributed one important fact to this discussion when in his
first post he stated "I have never even sailed on a cat myself".

Cheers

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"sherwindu" wrote in message
...
*Stability. I don't see it actually from a comfort point of view as
much as safety. If the boat doesn't rotate 45 degrees because of
fluke wind shift it means my wife and son don't get thrown around like
rag dolls.

Strong winds do not suddenly shift like that. You can get that in
light
airs
and then such an effect is minimal on the boat. Of course, an
accidental
jig could cause some problems, but we won't address that.

They do out here. We have a spot on the bay called Hurricane Gulch.
Happens there all the time.

*Positive bouyancy.

This could be incorporated into a monohull, if it was a high
priority objective.

. I can stop and launch a
dingy to assist another boat in just 3 or 4 minutes.

I tow my dinghy behind the boat, so launching is not an issue.

On long distance cruises?? That's fine for a couple of hours, but you can
run into real problems with a dinghy under tow, not to mention slowing the
boat.

*large wide decks.

A possible advantage.

I would say huge advantage. It's much harder to accidentally fall off.

*Shallow draft.

This is a definite advantage for places like the Bahamas.

Or any place you want to get close in.

*Good visibility from inside.

Monohulls have windows, don't they?

Sure, but they aren't panoramic. He said "good visibility." :-)

*twin short keels. It allows us to "walk" off a beach and easily
kedge ourselves back into the water should we drag onto the shore (ok,
not too proud to admit that). But imagine having dragged anchor in the
middle of the night. In a monohull you'd be woken up by the fact they
you are lying completely on your side with waves threatening to wash
into your cockpit and down the companionway.

On the contrary, you get woken up when your keel starts bumping on the
bottom, and you don't go over, you just sit where you are, aground.
You

Well, possibly true, but I'd rather deal with the situation in an upright
position than on my ear.

Deliberately running aground is also an option to get a decent night's
sleep. It's not great for the bottom paint, but it's much more of an
option. We had to do that in Belize.. that or sail all night (which the
charter company specifically told us not to do, due to fishing pots and
small fishing boats with no lights).

are in an anchorage where despite strong winds, you should not get
big waves.



*Most catamaran thru hulls are above the waterline. I've seen too
many monohulls sink because a hose fitting for their sinks came loose
during the night. I've also had my hose fittings also come loose on
my galley sink drain, and had to tighten them again. That's it. No
water rushing in, no panics.

This kind of design is not peculiar to multihulls. My monohull has all
it's thru hulls below the water line.

I think that's what he said... :-)

*Capsizing - Some believe that the monohull ability to heel to dump a
gust of wind gives them an advantage because the catamaran can't heel.
True, cat's don't heel. We accelerate.

There is a limit to how fast your catamaran will go. I have seen
pictures
of catamarans with one hull lifted out of the water. A strong enough
wind is going to blow it over.

Of course there are limits. There are also limits to how much pressure
your hatch boards can take when bording water. The point is that instead
of heeling, the multi sails faster.

All else aside, a catamaran has two basic STABLE configurations,
upright

and upside down. A monohull has only one STABLE configuration,
upright.

Nope. It's got two. Upright on the top and upright on the bottom. :-)

That's the way catamarans
have the same "pressure valve" for dumping unexpected gusts, we can't
heel, therefore the force is directed into motion forward. That's the
safety valve.

When your upwind hull comes out of the water, there goes your safety
valve.
Wave action can contribute to this problem. I can judge this problem
easily
on a monohull by the amount of heel. On a catamaran, you have to be a
very
good judge of speed, or otherwise you will have little warning, except
for the
upwind hull coming up, and by then, it may be too late.

True, especially on crusing cats. However, this an extremely rare
occurance and just a bit of careful thought will prevent it.

I've been in the gulf stream in November, in large
waves and trade winds down in the caribbean, I go fast.

I think you have been very lucky up to now.

I think he's probably very skilled.

While going
fast I can take my time and reef the sails without worrying about
falling over the rails. I think the reason this keeps coming up is
that every serious cruiser in a monohull has had a knock down and that
fear is very present in their minds.

The serious monohull sailors keep their sail plan under control by
reefing,
heaving to, or going bare pole, so most of them don't experience knock
downs.

Absolutely true! ... as should all sailors.

I've been in the same wind gusts
on a monohull and a catamaran. The monohull was knocked down and then
righted itself, the catamaran just went faster. We do tend to
compensate for this by sailing more by the numbers than a monohull
would (reef at 20 knots, reef again at 30 knots, even if it feels
completely under control).

I hope this helps some who are looking at catamarans. Almost every
reason I have isn't due to convenience, it's due to safety.

I agree that multihulls are great for speed and shallow draft. When it
comes
to safety, I completely dissagree. I would not try any remote offshore
cruising
with a catamaran.

You would be in a vocal majority, ill-informed as they are. Many, many
multis have crossed oceans even in terrible conditions and had no problems
at all. Same is true of monos. Both types of vessel can and are seakindly
in extreme conditions. One of the jobs of an experienced skipper is to
avoid extreme conditions.

The previous postings about losing the mast are not the
prevalent case. More often, the mast is mostly intact, and sailing can
resume.

More often? Not sure I agree. If you have sails up and the boat turtles, I
think there's a good probability you're going to lose your rig. All the
time? No. But a significant amount of time to make it common.

I can only speak from the experience of being on a heeling boat for 1/2
month at a time. It gets old pretty fast... everything needs to be nailed
down or, as I tell my students, it will end up safely on the floor.

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

"Paddy Malone" wrote in message
...
Well said, and a great post from boatgeek.

Another important consideration is the effect of heeling and rolling on
crew performance. The U.S. naval study of this by JB Hadler and TH Sarchin
(see The Cruising Multihull by Chris White) found that a sustained 10
degree roll angle reduced ability to perform routine tasks by as much as
50%!

sherwindu has contributed one important fact to this discussion when in
his first post he stated "I have never even sailed on a cat myself".

Cheers

"Capt. JG" wrote in message
...
"sherwindu" wrote in message
...
*Stability. I don't see it actually from a comfort point of view as
much as safety. If the boat doesn't rotate 45 degrees because of
fluke wind shift it means my wife and son don't get thrown around like
rag dolls.

Strong winds do not suddenly shift like that. You can get that in
light
airs
and then such an effect is minimal on the boat. Of course, an
accidental
jig could cause some problems, but we won't address that.

They do out here. We have a spot on the bay called Hurricane Gulch.
Happens there all the time.

*Positive bouyancy.

This could be incorporated into a monohull, if it was a high
priority objective.

. I can stop and launch a
dingy to assist another boat in just 3 or 4 minutes.

I tow my dinghy behind the boat, so launching is not an issue.

On long distance cruises?? That's fine for a couple of hours, but you can
run into real problems with a dinghy under tow, not to mention slowing
the boat.

*large wide decks.

A possible advantage.

I would say huge advantage. It's much harder to accidentally fall off.

*Shallow draft.

This is a definite advantage for places like the Bahamas.

Or any place you want to get close in.

*Good visibility from inside.

Monohulls have windows, don't they?

Sure, but they aren't panoramic. He said "good visibility." :-)

*twin short keels. It allows us to "walk" off a beach and easily
kedge ourselves back into the water should we drag onto the shore (ok,
not too proud to admit that). But imagine having dragged anchor in the
middle of the night. In a monohull you'd be woken up by the fact they
you are lying completely on your side with waves threatening to wash
into your cockpit and down the companionway.

On the contrary, you get woken up when your keel starts bumping on the
bottom, and you don't go over, you just sit where you are, aground.
You

Well, possibly true, but I'd rather deal with the situation in an upright
position than on my ear.

Deliberately running aground is also an option to get a decent night's
sleep. It's not great for the bottom paint, but it's much more of an
option. We had to do that in Belize.. that or sail all night (which the
charter company specifically told us not to do, due to fishing pots and
small fishing boats with no lights).

are in an anchorage where despite strong winds, you should not get
big waves.



*Most catamaran thru hulls are above the waterline. I've seen too
many monohulls sink because a hose fitting for their sinks came loose
during the night. I've also had my hose fittings also come loose on
my galley sink drain, and had to tighten them again. That's it. No
water rushing in, no panics.

This kind of design is not peculiar to multihulls. My monohull has
all
it's thru hulls below the water line.

I think that's what he said... :-)

*Capsizing - Some believe that the monohull ability to heel to dump a
gust of wind gives them an advantage because the catamaran can't heel.
True, cat's don't heel. We accelerate.

There is a limit to how fast your catamaran will go. I have seen
pictures
of catamarans with one hull lifted out of the water. A strong enough
wind is going to blow it over.

Of course there are limits. There are also limits to how much pressure
your hatch boards can take when bording water. The point is that instead
of heeling, the multi sails faster.

All else aside, a catamaran has two basic STABLE configurations,
upright

and upside down. A monohull has only one STABLE configuration,
upright.

Nope. It's got two. Upright on the top and upright on the bottom. :-)

That's the way catamarans
have the same "pressure valve" for dumping unexpected gusts, we can't
heel, therefore the force is directed into motion forward. That's the
safety valve.

When your upwind hull comes out of the water, there goes your safety
valve.
Wave action can contribute to this problem. I can judge this problem
easily
on a monohull by the amount of heel. On a catamaran, you have to be a
very
good judge of speed, or otherwise you will have little warning, except
for the
upwind hull coming up, and by then, it may be too late.

True, especially on crusing cats. However, this an extremely rare
occurance and just a bit of careful thought will prevent it.

I've been in the gulf stream in November, in large
waves and trade winds down in the caribbean, I go fast.

I think you have been very lucky up to now.

I think he's probably very skilled.

While going
fast I can take my time and reef the sails without worrying about
falling over the rails. I think the reason this keeps coming up is
that every serious cruiser in a monohull has had a knock down and that
fear is very present in their minds.

The serious monohull sailors keep their sail plan under control by
reefing,
heaving to, or going bare pole, so most of them don't experience
knock
downs.

Absolutely true! ... as should all sailors.

I've been in the same wind gusts
on a monohull and a catamaran. The monohull was knocked down and then
righted itself, the catamaran just went faster. We do tend to
compensate for this by sailing more by the numbers than a monohull
would (reef at 20 knots, reef again at 30 knots, even if it feels
completely under control).

I hope this helps some who are looking at catamarans. Almost every
reason I have isn't due to convenience, it's due to safety.

I agree that multihulls are great for speed and shallow draft. When
it
comes
to safety, I completely dissagree. I would not try any remote
offshore
cruising
with a catamaran.

You would be in a vocal majority, ill-informed as they are. Many, many
multis have crossed oceans even in terrible conditions and had no
problems at all. Same is true of monos. Both types of vessel can and are
seakindly in extreme conditions. One of the jobs of an experienced
skipper is to avoid extreme conditions.

The previous postings about losing the mast are not the
prevalent case. More often, the mast is mostly intact, and sailing
can
resume.

More often? Not sure I agree. If you have sails up and the boat turtles,
I think there's a good probability you're going to lose your rig. All the
time? No. But a significant amount of time to make it common.

Paddy Malone wrote:sherwindu has contributed one important fact to this
discussion when in his

first post he stated "I have never even sailed on a cat myself".


I am not questioning the comfort of a multihull, it's speed, etc. I'm basing my
views on many years
of ocean sailing experience and my education as an applied physicist/engineer.
My concern is one
of safety. I feel that a catamaran is not immune to tipping over, especially if
conditions do not permit
the reefing of sails. These comments about monohulls sinking is overstated.
Sure they do, but not
necesarily because of their basic design. Catamarans are made of fiberglass,
etc., which last I heard
is something that is heavier than water and will sink under certain
circumstances. Reducing sail can
decrease the probability of a roll in both monohulls and multihulls. Freak wave
action can roll a boat
over even with these precautions. I personally would feel safer and more
comfortable in a boat that
I know is going to come back up on it's own, with or without it's rigging, than
hoping I can get into a
watertight compartment with my boat floating upside down. The problem with
taking a multihull on an
extended voyage, say an ocean crossing, is that the chances of running into real
bad weather increase.
In the very extreme, one can take down all sails in a monohull, batten down the
hatches, put out a sea
anchor and ride things out. If for some reason the boat is rolled over, it will
right itself. Can't say the
same thing for a multihull. Granted this is an extreme case, but if I were
planning an ocean crossing,
it would certain cross my mind as a possibility.

Sherwin D.

"sherwindu" wrote in message
...
I'm basing my
views on many years
of ocean sailing experience and my education as an applied
physicist/engineer.
My concern is one
of safety. I feel that a catamaran is not immune to tipping over,

Of course not.


These comments about monohulls sinking is overstated.

Your evidence for this is what?

Sure they do, but not
necesarily because of their basic design.

Ever heard of Archimedes' law. I'd say the lead ballast tends to overcome
the bouyant effect of even wooden or foam glass monos. Isn't ballast part of
a mono's "basic design"?


Catamarans are made of fiberglass,
etc., which last I heard
is something that is heavier than water and will sink under certain
circumstances.

Most are foam glass, some are wood, nearly all have multiple sealed chambers
for buoyancy. I calculated the surface area of my last cruising cat, which
was foam glass, and found that the foam itself was sufficient floatation for
the whole boat. It also had four large floatation tanks built in, which were
also more buoyant than displacement.


Reducing sail can
decrease the probability of a roll in both monohulls and multihulls.

True

Freak wave
action can roll a boat
over even with these precautions. I personally would feel safer and more
comfortable in a boat that
I know is going to come back up on it's own, with or without it's rigging,
than
hoping I can get into a
watertight compartment with my boat floating upside down. The problem
with
taking a multihull on an
extended voyage, say an ocean crossing, is that the chances of running
into real
bad weather increase.
In the very extreme, one can take down all sails in a monohull, batten
down the
hatches, put out a sea
anchor and ride things out.

Same for multis- parachute anchors have been proven time and again.

If for some reason the boat is rolled over, it will
right itself. Can't say the
same thing for a multihull.

If for some reason a mono's watertight state is breached it sinks- can't say
the same for a multi.

Granted this is an extreme case, but if I were
planning an ocean crossing,
it would certain cross my mind as a possibility.

As would sinking in a mono- you do carry a liferaft don't you ? Proof that
sinking can occur.

Peter HK

sherwindu wrote:
Paddy Malone wrote:sherwindu has contributed one important fact to
this discussion when in his

first post he stated "I have never even sailed on a cat myself".


I am not questioning the comfort of a multihull, it's speed, etc.
I'm basing my views on many years
of ocean sailing experience and my education as an applied
physicist/engineer. My concern is one
of safety. I feel that a catamaran is not immune to tipping over,
especially if conditions do not permit
the reefing of sails.

Cats can tip / trip, but usually this is the domain of racing cats with high
powered rigs and sailplans. These aren't the rig ratios you'll normally find
on a cruising multi. On heavier cruising cats or tri's, the beam ratio (and
inherent stability) is far more likely to see the rig wiped off from running
overpowered, than capsizing the boat. The truth is that cruising cat or tri
capsize is very unusual, and usually requires a combination of crew error
(or stupidity, like a recent capsize in Indonesia achieved under screecher
in 35+knots) with extreme wind and sea states to achieve.

These comments about monohulls sinking is
overstated. Sure they do, but not
necesarily because of their basic design. Catamarans are made of
fiberglass, etc., which last I heard
is something that is heavier than water and will sink under certain
circumstances.

Cats and Tri's generally won't sink, and I can't think of any that I know of
that have; but they can break up, which is their worst outcome and usually
results from some sort of 3rd party collision (reef, container,
whale/sunfish) to name a few, which is why I carry a liferaft. I read
elsewhere in this thread, and know of many other multihull sailors who don't
consider the expense and weight of a liferaft justified. I don't understand
this rationale when offshore sailing, but each to their own.

Reducing sail can
decrease the probability of a roll in both monohulls and multihulls.
Freak wave action can roll a boat
over even with these precautions. I personally would feel safer and
more comfortable in a boat that
I know is going to come back up on it's own, with or without it's
rigging, than hoping I can get into a
watertight compartment with my boat floating upside down.

Either outcome may be unavoidable, and both outcomes are unsatisfactory.
Have you ever been rolled right over in a keelboat? I'm guessing not,
because the one time I was (which was in a harbour, btw) the absolute chaos
below from shipped water, fouled supplies, loose equipment, battery acid and
the like made it no place to want to be for any period of time. I have never
capsized on a cabin-sized multi, and doubt it would be much better inside,
although the idea of inflating and securing the liferaft on the inverted
hull(s) once the conditions quieten down has some appeal - although I'm not
sure how it would work in practice. I suppose it could be allright if one
had rigged some points in advance to secure everyhing.

The
problem with taking a multihull on an
extended voyage, say an ocean crossing, is that the chances of
running into real bad weather increase.
In the very extreme, one can take down all sails in a monohull,
batten down the hatches, put out a sea
anchor and ride things out. If for some reason the boat is rolled
over, it will right itself. Can't say the
same thing for a multihull. Granted this is an extreme case, but if
I were planning an ocean crossing,
it would certain cross my mind as a possibility.

The theory of lying to a parachute on a multi is standard heavy-weather
practice. I've never heard of one capsizing from this situation. In fact,
the multi lying to on a correctly set bridle and parachute is really a
pretty comfortable solution when circumstances dictate it.

Why don't you get out on a cat or tri sometime, and observe the differences
for yourself? There are a lot of differences between multis and monos, and
mostly they don't bear repeating, having been covered elsewhere in this
thread. I sail multis primarily because the cruising grounds in easy reach
here are quite shallow and require occasional foray into very shoal waters.
Running a deep-draft keelboat would be a pain in the arse, and I don't much
care for the performance of shallow-bilged monos.

I like cats, tris and monos, and can appreciate the relative merits of all 3
styles, and personally, I wouldn't hesitate to venture offshore in a well
found example of either type.

Ian

Ian George wrote:

The truth is that cruising cat or tri
capsize is very unusual, and usually requires a combination of crew error
(or stupidity, like a recent capsize in Indonesia achieved under screecher
in 35+knots) with extreme wind and sea states to achieve.

I guess you never heard of Murphy's law about things that can go wrong,
sometimes do. For example, in a sudden storm, there may not be enough
time to sufficiently shorten sail, or something jams and you can't let the
sheets out in time, or the sail jams in the track and can't be shortened,
etc. I'm not saying these are common occurences, but they are not out
of the realm of possibility.



These comments about monohulls sinking is
overstated. Sure they do, but not
necesarily because of their basic design. Catamarans are made of
fiberglass, etc., which last I heard
is something that is heavier than water and will sink under certain
circumstances.

Cats and Tri's generally won't sink, and I can't think of any that I know of
that have; but they can break up,

Well, that's another concern I would have about seaworthyness of multihulls.

which is their worst outcome and usually
results from some sort of 3rd party collision (reef, container,
whale/sunfish) to name a few, which is why I carry a liferaft. I read
elsewhere in this thread, and know of many other multihull sailors who don't
consider the expense and weight of a liferaft justified. I don't understand
this rationale when offshore sailing, but each to their own.

For the same reason that wings break off a plane under extreme wind stress,
this failure could happen on a multihull, due to poor design or construction.



Reducing sail can
decrease the probability of a roll in both monohulls and multihulls.
Freak wave action can roll a boat
over even with these precautions. I personally would feel safer and
more comfortable in a boat that
I know is going to come back up on it's own, with or without it's
rigging, than hoping I can get into a
watertight compartment with my boat floating upside down.

Either outcome may be unavoidable, and both outcomes are unsatisfactory.
Have you ever been rolled right over in a keelboat?

Thank goodness, no. I have managed in big blows to keep the boat under
control by heaving to or going to bare poles.

I'm guessing not,
because the one time I was (which was in a harbour, btw) the absolute chaos
below from shipped water, fouled supplies, loose equipment, battery acid and
the like made it no place to want to be for any period of time. I have never
capsized on a cabin-sized multi, and doubt it would be much better inside,
although the idea of inflating and securing the liferaft on the inverted
hull(s) once the conditions quieten down has some appeal - although I'm not
sure how it would work in practice. I suppose it could be allright if one
had rigged some points in advance to secure everyhing.

I don't think discomfort is the issue here, but survival. Any kind of a
knockdown
or rollover is going to cause havoc on any boat.



The
problem with taking a multihull on an
extended voyage, say an ocean crossing, is that the chances of
running into real bad weather increase.
In the very extreme, one can take down all sails in a monohull,
batten down the hatches, put out a sea
anchor and ride things out. If for some reason the boat is rolled
over, it will right itself. Can't say the
same thing for a multihull. Granted this is an extreme case, but if
I were planning an ocean crossing,
it would certain cross my mind as a possibility.

The theory of lying to a parachute on a multi is standard heavy-weather
practice. I've never heard of one capsizing from this situation. In fact,
the multi lying to on a correctly set bridle and parachute is really a
pretty comfortable solution when circumstances dictate it.

Why don't you get out on a cat or tri sometime, and observe the differences
for yourself?

As I stated earlier, I'm sure the multihulls give a comfortable ride in most

sailing conditions. The extreme conditions I have been refering to are not
the kind I would want to test.

There are a lot of differences between multis and monos, and
mostly they don't bear repeating, having been covered elsewhere in this
thread. I sail multis primarily because the cruising grounds in easy reach
here are quite shallow and require occasional foray into very shoal waters.
Running a deep-draft keelboat would be a pain in the arse, and I don't much
care for the performance of shallow-bilged monos.

Makes sense to me. In my many cruises to the Bahamas, I occasionally had
difficulties with my 4 foot draft finding safe anchorages. My dinghy allowed

me to visit any nearby place I wanted to go.



I like cats, tris and monos, and can appreciate the relative merits of all 3
styles, and personally, I wouldn't hesitate to venture offshore in a well
found example of either type.

Offshore is a general term. It could mean you are within close proximity to
a
port, if the weather turns very nasty. Crossing an ocean doesn't give you
that option, so you better be sure your boat can take it and leave you in
a position where recovery is still within possibility.



Ian

While reading rec.boats.cruising, I noticed sherwindu
felt compelled to write:



Ian George wrote:

The truth is that cruising cat or tri
capsize is very unusual, and usually requires a combination of crew error
(or stupidity, like a recent capsize in Indonesia achieved under screecher
in 35+knots) with extreme wind and sea states to achieve.

I guess you never heard of Murphy's law about things that can go wrong,
sometimes do. For example, in a sudden storm, there may not be enough
time to sufficiently shorten sail, or something jams and you can't let the
sheets out in time, or the sail jams in the track and can't be shortened,
etc. I'm not saying these are common occurences, but they are not out
of the realm of possibility.

Well, I have heard of Murphy, and he's been on my boats, Mono and
Multi - fact remains that these circumstances are equally applicable
to both types of craft, so I don't think that the outcomes would be
any more catastrophic. The first rule of multihull sailing is 'If you
cannot reef quickly and easily, don't go to sea'. 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.

You seem to not take into consideration the different techniques that
are applied to competently handling the vessel type.


These comments about monohulls sinking is
overstated. Sure they do, but not
necesarily because of their basic design. Catamarans are made of
fiberglass, etc., which last I heard
is something that is heavier than water and will sink under certain
circumstances.

Cats and Tri's generally won't sink, and I can't think of any that I know of
that have; but they can break up,

Well, that's another concern I would have about seaworthyness of multihulls.

If you hit a container hard enough to rupture a lead-ballasted
sailboat it will sink. If you hit the same container at the same rate
in a multihull in may break up, how this reflects on the relative
merits of the seaworthiness of either boat type baffles me.

which is their worst outcome and usually
results from some sort of 3rd party collision (reef, container,
whale/sunfish) to name a few, which is why I carry a liferaft. I read
elsewhere in this thread, and know of many other multihull sailors who don't
consider the expense and weight of a liferaft justified. I don't understand
this rationale when offshore sailing, but each to their own.

For the same reason that wings break off a plane under extreme wind stress,
this failure could happen on a multihull, due to poor design or construction.


Poor design and construction on a monohull or a multihull would be a
problem for me. There are good and bad examples of both.


Reducing sail can
decrease the probability of a roll in both monohulls and multihulls.
Freak wave action can roll a boat
over even with these precautions. I personally would feel safer and
more comfortable in a boat that
I know is going to come back up on it's own, with or without it's
rigging, than hoping I can get into a
watertight compartment with my boat floating upside down.

Either outcome may be unavoidable, and both outcomes are unsatisfactory.
Have you ever been rolled right over in a keelboat?

Thank goodness, no. I have managed in big blows to keep the boat under
control by heaving to or going to bare poles.

I'm guessing not,
because the one time I was (which was in a harbour, btw) the absolute chaos
below from shipped water, fouled supplies, loose equipment, battery acid and
the like made it no place to want to be for any period of time. I have never
capsized on a cabin-sized multi, and doubt it would be much better inside,
although the idea of inflating and securing the liferaft on the inverted
hull(s) once the conditions quieten down has some appeal - although I'm not
sure how it would work in practice. I suppose it could be allright if one
had rigged some points in advance to secure everyhing.

I don't think discomfort is the issue here, but survival. Any kind of a
knockdown
or rollover is going to cause havoc on any boat.


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.



The
problem with taking a multihull on an
extended voyage, say an ocean crossing, is that the chances of
running into real bad weather increase.
In the very extreme, one can take down all sails in a monohull,
batten down the hatches, put out a sea
anchor and ride things out. If for some reason the boat is rolled
over, it will right itself. Can't say the
same thing for a multihull. Granted this is an extreme case, but if
I were planning an ocean crossing,
it would certain cross my mind as a possibility.

The theory of lying to a parachute on a multi is standard heavy-weather
practice. I've never heard of one capsizing from this situation. In fact,
the multi lying to on a correctly set bridle and parachute is really a
pretty comfortable solution when circumstances dictate it.

Why don't you get out on a cat or tri sometime, and observe the differences
for yourself?

As I stated earlier, I'm sure the multihulls give a comfortable ride in most

sailing conditions. The extreme conditions I have been refering to are not
the kind I would want to test.

Well, to be perfectly honest, I don't know anyone who actively seeks
out these conditions :-)

There are a lot of differences between multis and monos, and
mostly they don't bear repeating, having been covered elsewhere in this
thread. I sail multis primarily because the cruising grounds in easy reach
here are quite shallow and require occasional foray into very shoal waters.
Running a deep-draft keelboat would be a pain in the arse, and I don't much
care for the performance of shallow-bilged monos.

Makes sense to me. In my many cruises to the Bahamas, I occasionally had
difficulties with my 4 foot draft finding safe anchorages. My dinghy allowed

me to visit any nearby place I wanted to go.



I like cats, tris and monos, and can appreciate the relative merits of all 3
styles, and personally, I wouldn't hesitate to venture offshore in a well
found example of either type.

Offshore is a general term. It could mean you are within close proximity to
a
port, if the weather turns very nasty. Crossing an ocean doesn't give you
that option, so you better be sure your boat can take it and leave you in
a position where recovery is still within possibility.

Within the capabilities of the craft and its crew. Facing the bleak
facts, on boats of any configuration, it is frequently the crew that
fails, long before the well-found vessel will founder.

Offshore to me is 200miles.

Cheers,
Ian

Most of your comments have been addressed by others, but I'll add a few:


sherwindu wrote:

These comments about monohulls sinking is overstated.
Sure they do, but not necesarily because of their basic design.

The big lead keel has a lot to do with it. A serious breech will sink
a monohull in a few minutes. Although it possible to build a monohull
with positive flotation, only one builder does.

Catamarans are made of fiberglass,
etc., which last I heard
is something that is heavier than water and will sink under certain
circumstances.

Actually, you're wrong on this. Many cats (most? all?) are made with
a lot of structural foam (corecell, klegecell, etc.) such that the
bare hull of a cat is often lighter that water. In addition, most
have sealed compartments scattered around the hull, mine has six, four
in the bows, and two by the engines. Further, the basic shape of a
cat implies that leaking will be isolated to one hull.

The net result is that a cat will survive leaks that will sink a
monohull in a matter of minutes. There are a number of cases cats
returning to port with serious leaks and only have the floorboards
awash. When a monohull does survive serious breeches, it is often
riding so low that the crew retreats to a liferaft.

....

In the very extreme, one can take down all sails in a monohull, batten down the
hatches, put out a sea
anchor and ride things out. If for some reason the boat is rolled over, it will
right itself. Can't say the
same thing for a multihull. Granted this is an extreme case, but if I were
planning an ocean crossing,

Yes, it is a small possibility in extreme weather. Unfortunately, the
possibilities for a monohull sinking are larger, and can happen anywhere.


From previous post:

Monohulls have windows, don't they?

You have to be kidding with this one. Unless you have a pilothouse,
you have almost no visibility from "down below" in most monohulls.
Benches are below the waterline, side hatches are small and above your
line of sight, and many cruisers have visibility impaired by gear on
deck. Cats, on the other hand, have the saloon two feet above the
waterline, and usually have full panoramic vision from the normal
seating area.


On the contrary, you get woken up when your keel
starts bumping on the
bottom, and you don't go over, you just sit where
you are, aground.

You don't cruise where there are tides, do you? Where I cruise if you
don't get off within 10 minutes, you'll likely there for a while,
probably on your side. (unless, of course, you have twin keels)


You are in an anchorage where
despite strong winds, you should not get
big waves.

You may not have big waves in the anchorage, but breakers on a beach
can effectively trap a boat.


There is a limit to how fast your catamaran will go.
I have seen pictures
of catamarans with one hull lifted out of the water.

This probably wasn't a cruising cat; it certainly wasn't a
conservative rig such as a Prout.