Visit our Popular Forums

magentawave · 16-07-2015, 13:04

Sorry but I don't know of any available but I remember those. Quite the ugly ducklings but if they held up and sailed well then okay. I wonder if Ian Farrier was inspired by that design?

Boatguy30 · 16-07-2015, 13:56

One of those departed NZ for Tonga in October 2005. Several months later, one AMA was found with "2POB" scratched into the bottom paint. No doubt by desperate fingernail.

Maybe you can get a sweet deal on the main hull and other AMA if anyone ever finds them........

Buzzman · 16-07-2015, 17:01

Look like pretty low-volume floats, I'd guess it's more of a 'stabilised mono' than a 'proper' trimaran.

In that small pic on the sales site the floats appear to be almost awash with the vaka upright, so I imagine they'd pretty quickly submarine in any sort of a blow..??

steve ripples · 16-07-2015, 17:16

Boatguy

The tri in that incident was a different design and, while built by an experienced sailor, it was a home build and wooden. I can't identify the design - anyone know? Or was it designed by Gary Cull, the builder and owner?

Here's the story and boat photo:

'Help 2 p.o.b' written on wreck - World - smh.com.au

Buzzman · 16-07-2015, 17:38

That incident simply reinforces what people like Jim Brown have been saying for years: multihulls need to be fitted out for upside-down-running, as they seldom sink when flipped, and can be survivable for months - given the right resources - a la Rose Noelle.

In this case, clearly both sailors survived being flipped for some time after it happened, as per the writing on the hull, but perhaps they gave up waiting to be rescued and set off in a dinghy or inflatable and so later came to grief? Or ran out of food and water? Or got swept off the upturned hulls trying to right the vessel? We'll never know.

In my humble opinion this is a clear case of the authorities under-estimating how long a multi can stay afloat, and calling off the search way too soon.

Having said that, in 2005 they should have had a mandatory EPIRB aboard, which ought to have been able to be activated if it was properly secured in the boat.

Another tragedy that could, possibly, have been averted.

I don't accept that the boat was 'unseaworthy' - unless someone with specific maritime engineering knowledge sighted the boat immediately prior to departure and noted something specific that might have made it so.

Clearly, the experiences of the other sailor mentioned, the South African trip of 7000nm, is evidence enough that such boats are OK offshore.

And that's not the only one.....plenty of Farriers and other folding tris have sailed the oceans of the world successfully, even racing, so saying a folding tri is unsafe offshore is just ignorant, if not wilfully malicious.

Any and every boat can suffer a misadventure, as clearly happened in the Cull case, but as the Rose Noelle case exemplifies, such misadventures - in trimarans - can be survivable.

It is one of the detriments but also the benefits of multis that they are just as stable wrong way up as they are right way up.

Effectively, their greatest strength is also their greatest weakness.

Like motorcyclists everywhere, a multi sailors watchword must be "stay upright".

Boatguy30 · 16-07-2015, 18:04

My mistake, but you see the resemblance. either way, no way i'd go offshore on this erector set multi.

Buzzman · 16-07-2015, 18:30

Tempted to agree with you, as the attachment system for the outer end of the aka looks less than well engineered, but then, if you've looked closely at Dragonfly or Farrier folding systems, they don't appear to be too 'well-engineered' at first glance either - but clearly they are.

That single attachment point for the outer end of the aka is probably no less intrinsically safe than the single 3/4" diameter pivot bolt used on Dragonfly's system, although admittedly the Dragonfly does have a water-stay attachment to carry much of the load.

And Farrier's folding system itself forms the water-stay, so if anyone were to point a finger, then lack of a visible waterstay is probably the 'engineering issue' referred to.

So in this case, maybe 'less than adequately engineered' is not an unreasonable criticism.

But who knows what misadventure befell the vessel. Without knowing whether the aka attachment point failed - so causing the boat to flip - or if the aka became detached during a broach and roll..??

We'll never know. But not having a secured and registered EPIRB, in this day and age, is certainly unwise at the least.

I certainly wouldn't set off to cross an ocean without one...just in case....

Boatguy30 · 16-07-2015, 19:07

Farrier will be the first to tell you his folding designs are not intended for bluewater sailing. Many have, but not designed to.

Buzzman · 16-07-2015, 19:39

True, but how much of that is just 'covering his arse'.

There are plenty of smaller craft, like the 24-ft mono that recently sailed right round the American continent, that probably would not be 'recommended' for offshore work, never mind rounding the Horn.

Equally there are numerous designs of all shapes and sizes - designed specifically for 'offshore' sailing - that 'failed to return' due to misadventure.

And let's not mention Webb Chiles or Frank Dye.....or William Bligh.....or Matthew Flinders....or Ernest Shackleton.... all of whom set off to cross oceans and dangerous seas in boats clearly not 'designed' to do so, and lived to tell the tale.

Simply stating that a boat is 'not designed' *specifically* for a selected purpose does not necessarily make it, ipso facto, *un*-suitable.

Not perfect, not ideal, not designed, but not necessarily unsuitable.

There were a number of smaller Farrier boats that circumnavigated back in the day, when they were still being home-built from plywood with nothing more than an epoxy coating to waterproof them.

And it is testament to the initial *over*-engineering of Ian's folder design that he has since then altered it a few times so that the system relies entirely on the pivot bolts to carry the loads, without the additional inboard 'beam structures' that were in the initial design of the aka.

Considering Ian does design his boats for racing, and racing hard, which as we know can involve massive shock loads and heavy strains when sailing at 9/10ths or more, the inherent 'fat' built into the design loads ought to be more than enough to cope with loads placed on the components when sailed offshore by a prudent sailor.

I certainly wouldn't take a Farrier into the Southern Ocean under race conditions, although given the coverage and SAR focus duing such ocean races, it's probably safer to do so than for a relative novice cruiser such as Cull setting off unaccompanied into the Tasman Sea.

Unless sailors are regularly communicating via satellite or radio their position and intentions, too often I think in such cases it is way too late before the authorities even start looking for 'lost' sailors.

For example, Cull and Vernon could have been overturned two days out of Wellington, but not reported missing for up to a week or even two weeks later, as it would depend on what allowance they'd offered as a 'window' for arriving in Tonga and returning to contact with the world.

Not knowing where the boat went over, it makes it hard for SAR to calculate drift and likely location for the upturned craft, or a dinghy or life raft. It's akin to the search for the Malaysian aircraft in the Indian Ocean. Needle in the proverbial damp haystack.

Personally, I think multis should be required to be capable of self-recovery, but with all the comms aids these days we've become complacent and simply expect 'the authorities' to come to our aid regardless.

How many times do we read of mono (and multi) sailors being winched from otherwise floating and functioning craft, said craft later washing ashore relatively intact, often thousands of miles away?

Without radio, they'd have had to stick it out and figure out how to survive and then how to navigate to safety, or at least, to stay afloat and survive long enough to be spotted by another vessel.

Whatever the case, it was a tragedy that they lost their lives, and as we can't possibly know the circumstances, we should just let it go at that.
Tragic misadventure.

Sand crab · 16-07-2015, 19:51

Ok. Back to cheap projects. Here's a 32' Piver tri going up for auction in San Diego this Saturday.
BOAT LIEN SALE

Boatguy30 · 17-07-2015, 05:32

Yes, but again the issue is the boat coming apart into multiple pieces. This is not an issue with the mostly blasted moons you site. Loose a hull and it's like loosing the keel. What happens to most monos offshore when the keel falls off?

Cavalier MK2 · 17-07-2015, 07:54

Oceanbirds actually have a decent reputation. It is a odd duck but apparently works well, the amas are wave piercing and the main hull flare assists in a catastrophic knockdown. I haven't heard of any coming apart or capsizing, but every boat needs evaluation on a case by case basis. Some were sold as kits so specs need to be carefully checked just like any old boat after years of owner maintenance and modification.

Buzzman · 18-07-2015, 00:25

B-g
I agree. Any coming apart of a multi would be akin to a mono losing its keel. It would tend to roll again and again.
As you said, the examples I cited the boats merely flipped, but stayed together.
I guess that's as good an argument as any against folders for offshore work, but have seen enough evidence on various forums of boats losing half a hull, or the aka failing - non-catastrophically - to reason that it's an unlikely scenario in a well-founded boat.
Emphasis on well-founded.
Even Dragonfly recommends replacing the stainless-steel 'joints' on their folders at least every five years, in case of fatigue, which certainly supports the 'maintenance and build quality is essential' on folders, and definitely more so than on fixed-wing tris.
I'm only super-defensive because I want to build a folder - and take it offshore - and I know it will have to be done exceptionally well.
Alas, the fixed-wing design really only 'works' for anchoring out and for open waters. If you plan to use marinas it's a financial burden, and if planning to trail and store on land, virtually impossible without a folder, due to the fixed beam. I live on a river that is not conducive to anchoring out, so trailing is my only real storage option.
It's for those reasons, not any inherent safety that I have chosen a small folding tri.
And I will be forced to use what I have, as financially there is no alternative. I simply can't afford to buy a decent sized cat or tri.
Sure, I could buy a 24-ft Triton, or similar mono tomorrow, and go sailing by Xmas, and certainly I'd be OK with that inshore, but it's not the boat I *want* to be sailing, so I'm going to build that.
And why I'm posting here is that it will be a "cheap multi" as it's built to bare hull stage atm and so far has cost me only the fuel required to collect it.
And the trailer I needed to haul it...and the mast and rig I bought for it seperately....so am into it for about $2500 so far, with a budget of around $10K to get on the water.
Which should get me the equivalent of either a Farrier or Dragonfly 24, and I don't see them seeling anywhere, in 'as new' condition, for anything much less than $20K, and usually more like $35+.
Anyway, we need to take this conversation elswhere and get back to 'other' cheap multis....apologies for the thread drift.
If anyone's interested, the 'build' thread (OK, so lack of building atm) is on boatdesign.net, here:
24ft Trimaran in Oz - Boat Design Forums