How many cats have flipped ?

[rickwest]

I have a 38 ft Lagoon catamaran..sailed across the Pacific...Panama to Thailand...I know of one cat..flipped..in a storm.2013.could not release the main halyard from the block...had no knife...I knew him
than while crossing..2015-2016
3 monohulls sank..one a friend
not a single cat sunk...never heard that one flipped...so in my experience...only mono hulls..went to the bottom...but we all have our stories..I had a monohull in the 1990s
I would never go back..once you own a cat you will never go back to one hull...it spoils you...level sailing...a little faster..allot less fuel...lots of space..a huge shower....they hold resale value
but I still will always like the look of a monohulls they are classic...like my 65 Ford Mustang I had in High School

[mikedefieslife]

Originally Posted by rickwest

I have a 38 ft Lagoon catamaran..sailed across the Pacific...Panama to Thailand...I know of one cat..flipped..in a storm.2013.could not release the main halyard from the block...had no knife...I knew him
than while crossing..2015-2016
3 monohulls sank..one a friend
not a single cat sunk...never heard that one flipped...so in my experience...only mono hulls..went to the bottom...but we all have our stories..I had a monohull in the 1990s
I would never go back..once you own a cat you will never go back to one hull...it spoils you...level sailing...a little faster..allot less fuel...lots of space..a huge shower....they hold resale value
but I still will always like the look of a monohulls they are classic...like my 65 Ford Mustang I had in High School

Are you talking specifically about the Lagoon 380? With such a massive production run it would be interesting to know how many if any have flipped and/or sunk.

I know us Prout owners tend to report incidents in the owners group and have a good idea how many out of a 2000+ production run have flipped or sunk (enough to count on one hand), and what the circumstances were.

[owly]

This is kind of an absurd thread....... cat = cat = cat = cat...... Older cats like the Gemini, Iroquois, and numerous others were too narrow beamed, and often had bridge deck extending way too far forward. Carrying too much sail they could be flipped easily. People flip cats and tris racing, but they are pushing them to the utmost limits. Newer designs in many cases are vastly improved with far greater beam, often well exceeding 50% of LOA, and most are designed with the bridge deck beginning well aft, and netting forward....... In a previous comment, someone mentioned the mistake of using canvas tramps instead of netting.

Clearly, lacking the feedback of heel, an inexperienced cat sailor is likely to overpower a cat, but that's a matter of seamanship & training.


Incidents like the Queen's Birthday Storm illustrate how safe modern cruising catamarans are in rough conditions...... they do not tend to get knocked down or capsized, or dismasted in conditions where the monohulls are taking a beating. A monohull may theoretically recover from a knockdown or capsize, but they often are so badly swamped that they ultimately succumb and are abandoned (Fastnet). Personally I would feel safer on a cat than a monohull in "survival conditions"......... Cats have proven to do a tremendous job of taking care of their crew. They do not stand and take a beating, lacking deep keels and a lot of ballast, they scoot away from blows like a light footed boxer dancing away from his opponent. They tend to accelerate away from that breaking wave, rather than standing to have it crash over them. Richard Woods describes his experience in a major gale on Eclipse, in which they were rescued, and he lost the boat...... which later was recovered virtually intact by locals https://www.sailingcatamarans.com/index.php/articles/38-offshore-cuising-articles/31-eclipse-perfect-storm-part-1

His description of conditions match beaufort force 10 to force 11 or 50-60 kts.

https://classic-sailing.co.uk/articl...beaufort-scale
They way it distorted his face is something I've never experienced, though I've been in winds in the 70-80 mph range on land many times, though living at 5K elevation, the effects are different than at sea level due to air density.. 80 mph here does little damage......... we endure that every year. In a place like Florida the same velocity is far more destructive.


I would rather be on a catamaran any day of the week in those conditions than a monohull!!

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I don't understand -- so you are questioning my right to run my diesel for 3 days? Because I am "fouling the common resources"? Really?


Well -- go jump in a lake.


I am a vegan, ride a bike to work, don't drive, don't use air conditioning. If it were relevant at all, which it's not, but since you brought it up -- my carbon footprint is definitely much smaller than yours, probably several times smaller. Your eating meat and consuming dairy products, just to take one thing, does vast ecological damage, not only carbon emissions, but land use, fresh water resources, and we won't even get into cruelty to animals. Diet has a bigger impact on carbon footprint than transportation choices. So why don't you tell us about your diet, and tell us how you can live with yourself, "fouling the common resources" in this inexcusable way?



Do you really want to start auditing each other's "fouling of common resources"? Comparing each other's carbon footprints? Is this at all an interesting conversation?

Oh OH

[Scotty Kiwi]

Originally Posted by boatman61

You mean a Vegan restaurant.???

A rabid right winger once said "Cure poverty and starvation ... eat the poor"?

Ancient tradition, once the monohull sinks, is to eat the poor cabin boy.
But not if the cabin boy was wealthy.

In modern times once y'uv flipped ya cat, sitting on the upturned hull, who's the meal of last resort?
- The skipper (a lot poorer post-flip)?
- The vegan (just another vegan animal)?
- The farter (probably the vegan)?
- Or the person who changes the conversation to "at least we've reduced our carbon footprint"?.

[mikedefieslife]

Originally Posted by owly

This is kind of an absurd thread....... cat = cat = cat = cat...... Older cats like the Gemini, Iroquois, and numerous others were too narrow beamed, and often had bridge deck extending way too far forward. Carrying too much sail they could be flipped easily. People flip cats and tris racing, but they are pushing them to the utmost limits. Newer designs in many cases are vastly improved with far greater beam, often well exceeding 50% of LOA, and most are designed with the bridge deck beginning well aft, and netting forward....... In a previous comment, someone mentioned the mistake of using canvas tramps instead of netting.

Clearly, lacking the feedback of heel, an inexperienced cat sailor is likely to overpower a cat, but that's a matter of seamanship & training.


Incidents like the Queen's Birthday Storm illustrate how safe modern cruising catamarans are in rough conditions...... they do not tend to get knocked down or capsized, or dismasted in conditions where the monohulls are taking a beating. A monohull may theoretically recover from a knockdown or capsize, but they often are so badly swamped that they ultimately succumb and are abandoned (Fastnet). Personally I would feel safer on a cat than a monohull in "survival conditions"......... Cats have proven to do a tremendous job of taking care of their crew. They do not stand and take a beating, lacking deep keels and a lot of ballast, they scoot away from blows like a light footed boxer dancing away from his opponent. They tend to accelerate away from that breaking wave, rather than standing to have it crash over them. Richard Woods describes his experience in a major gale on Eclipse, in which they were rescued, and he lost the boat...... which later was recovered virtually intact by locals https://www.sailingcatamarans.com/index.php/articles/38-offshore-cuising-articles/31-eclipse-perfect-storm-part-1

His description of conditions match beaufort force 10 to force 11 or 50-60 kts.

https://classic-sailing.co.uk/articl...beaufort-scale
They way it distorted his face is something I've never experienced, though I've been in winds in the 70-80 mph range on land many times, though living at 5K elevation, the effects are different than at sea level due to air density.. 80 mph here does little damage......... we endure that every year. In a place like Florida the same velocity is far more destructive.


I would rather be on a catamaran any day of the week in those conditions than a monohull!!

There is a problem with your assertions. It's not just about a wider beam it's about the ratio between the centre of beam, centre of effort, and weight of the boat that determines how stable it is. Many of the narrow beam cats were actually amazingly stable, more so than some modern ones.

The MK1 Iroquois often used for racing did indeed flip (there are pictures online with them carrying floats on the mast), the MK2 however is a very stable boat, as is the Commanche, and Apache. You mention modern cats in the Queens Birthday storm, but IIRC a Catalac (an old narrow beam cat) was also in that storm and was fine.

[boatman61]

If I recall correctly the Iroquois Mk2 had a tad more beam and shorter mast.. made all the difference.

[44'cruisingcat]

Tried to link to a video. Didn't work.

[owly]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

Tried to link to a video. Didn't work.

Just click the icon for the globe and paper clip, which is directly above the text window when you are typing a message. A window will pop up, into which you can paste a link cut from the site you are linking to..........

[smj]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

Tried to link to a video. Didn't work.

If it was the Facebook video it worked for me, but appears to have disappeared of this thread

[44'cruisingcat]

Thanks Owly, I think the problem was the link didn't lead where I had hoped..

[smj]

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...&id=1044520998

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by smj

If it was the Facebook video it worked for me, but appears to have disappeared of this thread

Maybe it did work then:


https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...&id=1044520998

Doesn't work for me. It's supposed to be a video of a storm on lake Geneva. Is that what you're seeing?

[owly]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

Maybe it did work then:


https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...&id=1044520998

Doesn't work for me. It's supposed to be a video of a storm on lake Geneva. Is that what you're seeing?

F__k Facebook!!!! I wish folks would not link to Facebook as they refuse to allow you to view that sort of thing without joining, and it will be a cold day in hell when I join.......I was briefly a member years ago for a specific purpose, and found nothing to like about it....... your mileage may vary. The bane of society... Facebook and Faux "news".



H.W.

[44'cruisingcat]

Yes, I would have preferred to link directly to the video. Don't know how though.