Bieker 53 - Exciting high performance cruiser

[fxykty]

Originally Posted by Just Another Sa

Where on this planet is that law enforced?

Please inform us so we all know to never go there to sail in our illegal boats.

It practically dictates that only condocats are legal, and not all of those meet the criteria even on protected waters.

Surely all cats ever used on olympics as well as hobie 16 are totally illegal then in the country there that law applies. They would need to reduce their upwind sail area more than 90% to be legal and no downwind sails at all.

The most absurd law I ever saw anywhere.

There are different standards that apply to different kind of boats and surely not for Hobie 16 and other beach cats - that would be absurd (though they have their own rules regarding flotation and such). But as soon as your boat can carry crew and/or passengers and leaves the protection of the bay, you can bet that there are a host of standards for stability, scantlings, fire safety, flotation, etc. that professional designers and builders have to follow. Just take a look at that CE or USCG loading plate - that wasn’t just given out because the builder asked nicely for it.

The cited regulations are applied in the US by the ABYC, which is the certifying body in the US for naval architects, yacht designers, and builders, and enforced by the USCG. They are similar to ISO regulations as well as Lloyd’s and Veritas standards used elsewhere, such as CE in Europe.

Note that these are not end-user regulations - they apply to the professionals designing and building the boat. Home built boats are largely exempt, but without certification you may have difficulty with registration and/or insurance.

Having such certification should be at least some reassurance that your boat was thoughtfully designed, built and commissioned for the purpose that you have for it. For example, if your boat has a CE plate that only shows up to Category B, then that may get not be the best boat to cross an ocean on.

Though of course, people have crossed oceans in plenty of craft with no certification at all, and lack of certification does not necessarily mean the designer or builder didn’t know what they’re doing. For those with home built boats, I’m absolutely not dismissing your boats.

[fxykty]

For the US, see this regarding regulations for recreational boats, for the manufacturer. http://www.uscgboating.org/regulatio...s-handbook.php

Here’s the same for Europe. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-m...ional-craft_en

Google is your friend for anywhere else in the world.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by fxykty

.....
A length constraint in capsized cruising (not racing, like the Bieker 53) boats certainly shallows the pool of boats. I can think of two Atlantic 47 that capsized while cruising, but am not sure of larger performance cats in the range you’ve referenced.

As for 50 feet and over condo cats - not many of those cruising the oceans. Possibly no more than there are performance cats of that size. The vast majority of cruising condo catamarans are in the low to mid 40s, with cruising performance cats perhaps 5-10 foot longer on average. Other than in charter operations, how often have you seen over 50 foot condo cats?

There are many 50ft and over condo cats and none are more exposed to capsizing than charter cats that are sailed by inexperienced sailors. On last years the market just went for bigger and bigger boats, cats included.

Today mass production boat builders have on their lines cats much bigger than 50ft and 50ft are almost mid sized cats. You can be sure that they would not be making cats of over 60fts if they were not selling them.

The number of Lagoon 50 already produced is huge. From the previous model, the 500 were produced 150 sailboats. Considering only Lagoons with 50ft and over there are more than 200 boats on the water, maybe 300.
https://www.cata-lagoon.com/

I am sorry to tell you that you are again confusing things. I am not trying to be sarcastic, sorry if I give that impression, but is that difficult to check on the information you post? Those too Atlantic performance cats where not 47ft cats but 57ft cats, Anna and Leopard:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CLlwKtdW94

http://www.wavetrain.net/news-a-view...nican-republic

Yes, besides the Biecker 53 there are more but I don't want to make this a list of capsized performance cruising cats since it gives a wrong impression. There are much more that never capsized even in what regards performance cats but there are also, regarding performance cat models that capsized, a hugely bigger proportion between number of boats produced and the ones that capsize.

Originally Posted by fxykty

Here’s where we differ - you refer to static stability and I’m referring to dynamic stability, that is, what happens once the cat begins to heel. That’s why I refer to other factors and that just referring to displacement (and beam) is misleading for real world comparisons. Maybe we can say we’re both right?

Static stability is a precise measurement, it is accessed by a stability curve and the area behind that curve corresponds to the energy that is needed to capsize a cat.

Dynamic stability is a vague concept and it is a different concept for many, including boat designers and naval engineers.

Regarding sailboats I think that the group that sees dynamic stability as the stability that depends on the way a sailboat reacts in a seaway dissipating, more or less, in other ways the energy that can be transformed in a rolling moment and capsize the boat.

Dynamic stability is different in what regards monohulls and monohulls that have a different behavior on a sea way. On monohulls the diferences between them are bigger than on multihulls but even in what regards cats there are diferences for instance between cats with dagerboards and cats with small long keels. Big diferences in weight can also be important due to a smaller inertia as well as freeboard due to the wind and breaking waves.

James Wharram and other cat designers dynamic stability is just 60% of static stability and in this case it is considered as the adequate stability regarding a safety factor and the one that should be considered for the calculation of sail area.

[contrail]

A length constraint in capsized cruising (not racing, like the Bieker 53) boats certainly shallows the pool of boats. I can think of two Atlantic 47 that capsized while cruising, but am not sure of larger performance cats in the range you’ve referenced.

Also, at least one Atlantic 56.

[smj]

Originally Posted by contrail

A length constraint in capsized cruising (not racing, like the Bieker 53) boats certainly shallows the pool of boats. I can think of two Atlantic 47 that capsized while cruising, but am not sure of larger performance cats in the range you’ve referenced.

Also, at least one Atlantic 56.

I believe those were Atlantic 57’s that capsized, Anna and Leopard.

[Bean Counter]

Some one posted a photo of a capsized Leopard 44 using this as proof of lack of stability - this boat sailed into a hurricane. Those Atlantics were caught in gale force as was the gunboat off US east coast. I don't recall ever seeing any other article regarding a volume factory boat that was capsized by other than hurricane force winds or a contributing factor such as hull breach.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by Bean Counter

Some one posted a photo of a capsized Leopard 44 using this as proof of lack of stability - this boat sailed into a hurricane. Those Atlantics were caught in gale force as was the gunboat off US east coast. I don't recall ever seeing any other article regarding a volume factory boat that was capsized by other than hurricane force winds or a contributing factor such as hull breach.

Yes there are. Not many and none with 50ft or over at least to my knowledge. I don't want to go that way. I was being positive not negative saying that there are not condo cats with 50ft or more that ever capsized.

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by Palarran

Do you think this accident with the loss of two lives should make race committees rethink allowing monohulls? Not allowing multihulls to race is either due to tradition or idiocracy, especially if the reason is concern for a capsize and loss of life.

Two die in Australian offshore race >> Scuttlebutt Sailing News

Race organizers hate to deal with lawyers.

I suggest you read the Notice of Race requirements for the Sydney to Hobart race. Drill deep down to the parts about hull construction. They demand builders and designers certificates that the original construction and any modifications/repairs meet published standards, or require a naval architect to sign-off on the boat before it can race. I wouldn't be surprised to see some future additions requiring inspections on older boats.

There are also strict minimum stability requirements to weed out radical designs like skimming dishes or catamarans.

They also require a qualifying passage before the race, which will hopefully shake out any loose keels.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Race organizers hate to deal with lawyers.

I suggest you read the Notice of Race requirements for the Sydney to Hobart race. Drill deep down to the parts about hull construction. They demand builders and designers certificates that the original construction and any modifications/repairs meet published standards, or require a naval architect to sign-off on the boat before it can race. I wouldn't be surprised to see some future additions requiring inspections on older boats.

There are also strict minimum stability requirements to weed out radical designs like skimming dishes or catamarans.

They also require a qualifying passage before the race, which will hopefully shake out any loose keels.

Like on any race that uses ISAF (now World Sailing) race rules. The rules include safety mandatory features on the boats and what is demanded is common to all races including Sydney Hobart. The only exception to the ISAF rules is the use of the engine for power sail systems, to allow Wild Oats to race.

On all main races that are raced under ISAF rules, multihulls are competing, with the exception of the Sydney-Hobart.

On the last Caribbean 600, that was raced under ISAF rules and that was raced with strong weather, you had a retirement rate on monohulls of 50% while 100% of the trimarans finished the race, even a small 30ft Australian one. Yes a cat capsized without life losses but I do remember that there was at least a yacht that lost the keel and capsized on the SH too.

[beiland]

WHAT is this...sounds like some of today's politicians ????

The stability of a cat remains the same if you sail with a reefed boat or not what varies is the rotating moment created by the wind on the sails.

Only going to inject one thought here. What if we could carry the same sail area as the lofty fractional rig sloop on a much shorter height rig, and concurrently build a very nice light weight hull (like a Gunboat) for cruising. Should be a pretty fast cruising cat?

But wait a minute, isn't my rig already 'reefed down'?? My mast aft rig on the 65 foot cat is approx 15 feet shorter than the comparible fractional sloop rig of the same sail area on this other 65' foot cat. And the rig on that 65' trimaran is approx 15 feet shorter as well...same sail areas. I would call this quite a reef. :!:

Too often in the past the cruising sailor has been asked to bow before this altar of 'hi-aspect-ration-is-the-best' theme that permeates the racing crowds concerned with upwind performance...as though this is some sort of ultimate configuration. I think the cruising sailor will be much happier with the lower aspect ratios that Marchaji found VERY effective for all other points of sailing. My rig seeks to use those lower aspect ratios.

[clockwork orange]

Originally Posted by Polux

Yes and a hell of a race!!! The racing trimarans have done very well, if I am not mistaken there was 3 and they all finished with Paradox being the first over the finish line.

That makes even more strange the problems with the performance cruising catamarans. A abandon tax of 80% is not normal, not even on a circumnavigation race and most of them have very experienced crews that race other international races including the fastnet.

I think Paradox would be more accurately described as a racer/cruiser tri no? Even so Rambler 88 did well to finish so close. Any idea of the relative crew sizes anyone.
As far as the number of cats that pulled out it seems to me from what I have read they almost all suffered from systems failure of some sort. We install a lot of complex systems on customers boats where I work and there is just no way the customer is going to be able to troubleshoot if something goes wrong in crappy weather and most people rely on these systems to leave the dock these days. I would guess that the mighty Morticia had less systems to fail. Fantastic effort on their part btw.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by clockwork orange

I think Paradox would be more accurately described as a racer/cruiser tri no?...

Well, yes if compared with Rambler or Phaedo, the mod70 trimaran that is the usual winner, but have you looked at Paradox's interior:


Some race boats have a not very different interior and that makes the Caro (Botin 65) interior look luxurious LOL.

[Just Another Sa]

Originally Posted by fxykty

There are different standards that apply to different kind of boats and surely not for Hobie 16 and other beach cats - that would be absurd (though they have their own rules regarding flotation and such). But as soon as your boat can carry crew and/or passengers and leaves the protection of the bay, you can bet that there are a host of standards for stability, scantlings, fire safety, flotation, etc. that professional designers and builders have to follow.

Indeed there are plenty of rules, but 2013/53/EU gives no limitations whatsoever for A-category habitable multihulls on mast height or sail area. Anything goes.
Neither are there any such laws in my country, therefore I'm very interested if it's illegal or in any way dangerously costly or problematic to visit other countries outside EU where to my surprise such laws do exist as proven by the link you gave.
Are those laws applicable for foreign flagged vessels or not?
Or are they only limiting what can be bought in USA or where ever?

I do consider the formulas in the law you linked as totally absurd also for habitable ocean going multihulls, not just for beach cats. But I still have no knowlidge on any limitations of their application. Is the linked rule for example only relevant for boats used for charter or other commercial activity, or also for any private use as well?
Are for examle selling gunboats now illegal in the USA? Is it so also for using them?
Or was that law only enforced in one state, not the whole country? If so where?

[fxykty]

Originally Posted by Just Another Sa

Indeed there are plenty of rules, but 2013/53/EU gives no limitations whatsoever for A-category habitable multihulls on mast height or sail area. Anything goes.

Neither are there any such laws in my country, therefore I'm very interested if it's illegal or in any way dangerously costly or problematic to visit other countries outside EU where to my surprise such laws do exist as proven by the link you gave.

Are those laws applicable for foreign flagged vessels or not?

Or are they only limiting what can be bought in USA or where ever?



I do consider the formulas in the law you linked as totally absurd also for habitable ocean going multihulls, not just for beach cats. But I still have no knowlidge on any limitations of their application. Is the linked rule for example only relevant for boats used for charter or other commercial activity, or also for any private use as well?

Are for examle selling gunboats now illegal in the USA? Is it so also for using them?

Or was that law only enforced in one state, not the whole country? If so where?

Any of the known production and custom recreational boat manufacturers, regardless of country of origin, no doubt were designed and built to appropriate regulations.

The regulations apply only to boat manufacturers - not to end users. I’ve never heard of a boat being refused entry or fined for not having a certification.

But a boat wouldn’t be able to be imported and/or sold (new, doesn’t apply to used) in a particular jurisdiction if it doesn’t have the correct certification. There are international equivalents of all the national regulations.

This isn’t a bad thing for end users; for example it means that a boat marketed as blue water actually has the physical properties of a boat that can safely cross oceans - higher stability, stronger structure, suitable windows for wave hits, etc.

[Just Another Sa]

Originally Posted by fxykty

But a boat wouldn’t be able to be imported and/or sold (new, doesn’t apply to used) in a particular jurisdiction if it doesn’t have the correct certification.

And a new gunboat (as well as several other performance multihulls) does not satisfy the requirements you quoted, therefore can't have the correct certification in the country with law as absurdly restrictive as indicated.
I guess that is not a problem for those who are aware of the issue and can register their boat elsewhere or buy a used one.
It will become a problem if visiting boats need to contact a lawyer beforehand to find out what restrictions exist these days. It's not practically possible for a non lawyer to keep up with law in every single country when such surprises become a reality in these days.