Lagoon Cat smashed in Thailand

[socaldmax]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Lagoon hull hole before installing thru hull, hummmmm!!

I'm no expert, but that does look pretty thin to me. What size Lagoon was that?


Do you have any pics of other hull holes for comparison?

[smj]

Originally Posted by socaldmax

You can't look at what's left of the hull and make a determination if it's thick enough and/or the right layup schedule for that size of boat?

Maybe that pic isn't good enough detail, but if you could see it in person, I'm sure you'd form an opinion as to quality of construction based on what's there, regardless of how much pounding it took. A larger vessel would obviously require a thicker, stronger hull than a smaller vessel.

Isn't it possible to look at the thickness and type of hull construction and get a good idea if it's extremely rugged, or just about right, or too weak for that particular vessel? Or how it compares to other brands in terms of durability.

Bingo! You got the prize! Seeing in person, the only way to determine whether the hull was a quality build. Otherwise we are just spinning our wheels talking about this.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by socaldmax

I'm no expert, but that does look pretty thin to me. What size Lagoon was that?

Not if that hole is a foot or more in diameter

Without a scale, it's meaningless.

[tuskie]

Originally Posted by smj

So would that be a 1/2" thru hull or an 1 1/2" thru hull? Once again, nothing to compare to

Come now SMJ, join in the game!

You should be able to clear see that the hull laminate is paper thin and composed of a plaster of Paris type resin poorly infused into a CSM of cotton wool. All Lagoons are like this below the waterline and above they are cored with soggy balsa. Bulkheads are attached with used chewing gum flavoured with Gauloises tobacco. It's plain to see!

It's a wonder that they float at all, let alone withstand a grounding on reef during a gale.

[Mike Sibley]

I have a 1993 Lagoon 37 TPI and I can assure you that the hulls (and decks) are balsa cored both above and below the waterline, except for a strip about 7-8 inches wide at the bottom of each hull, which is solid. I have no personal knowledge about later Lagoons, but I have always heard that they were balsa cores also.

[smj]

Originally Posted by tuskie

Come now SMJ, join in the game!



You should be able to clear see that the hull laminate is paper thin and composed of a plaster of Paris type resin poorly infused into a CSM of cotton wool. All Lagoons are like this below the waterline and above they are cored with soggy balsa. Bulkheads are attached with used chewing gum flavoured with Gauloises tobacco. It's plain to see!



It's a wonder that they float at all, let alone withstand a grounding on reef during a gale.

Just think, if the Titanic would have grounded on that reef instead of hitting an iceberg Leonardo De Caprio wouldn't have died from hypothermia!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by StuM

Not if that hole is a foot or more in diameter

Without a scale, it's meaningless.

Never see before a foot in diameter thru hull!!

[smj]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Never see before a foot in diameter thru hull!!

Cut out for saildrive?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[minaret]

Originally Posted by socaldmax

I'm no expert, but that does look pretty thin to me. What size Lagoon was that?


Do you have any pics of other hull holes for comparison?

Clearly standard 1 1/2" hole. That makes the hull thickness no more than 3/8", which agrees perfectly with what I've seen. Blow it up, and you'll clearly see the roving plies in the middle. Can't possibly be more than two plies of 24 oz. there. Without the extra matt for thickness, this is similar to the laminate schedule of a large sea kayak. Of course, the extra matt makes a huge difference. But if you had the same thickness of laminate, done in nothing but alternating layers of roving and matt, there would be at least four or five rovings in that layup instead of one or two. Don't know whether that CSM is chopper gun applied, but it sure looks like it. Next time I schedule back a repair on one of these boats, I'll document it thoroughly and post here.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by smj

Cut out for saildrive?

Port hole? Nothing to indicate that it is below the waterline either.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by weavis

Guys, whilst the semantics are going on, the fact remains that the evidence shows a fairly poor below waterline layup.

Now, I like Lagoons and for that reason, its a bit of a shock to see production models not be what they oughtta be!

I dont care how many cross oceans safely.......... it only took one leak in Concorde to end an illustrious safety record that screamed of more luck than good design.

This is not good, and certain circumstances NOT SAFE. This is the reality. I dont care if you all want to argue what Minaret actually meant, it doesnt change the fact that its not a strong or adequate hull.

I have crossed them off my list. I have grounded very hard in my time, and Im concerned that if I had been in this vessel, it would have been a poor outcome.

Try the Morcambe Bay in England for grounding. Tide will pull water out from under you and hit the bottom very hard......several times.

I doubt many of the vessels you are looking at would much better in a grounding with wave action.

Possibly one of the best would be something like 44C's Oram built out of Duplex balsa core.

Composite Panel | End Grain Balsa

[Ex-Calif]

If I were buying a boat to regularly park it on a reef then I might consider another boat.

If I buy a Lagoon and I want a light boat that can carry a lot with the caveat that I shouldn't park it on a reef then I may be perfectly fine with it.

You can't really call a design spec a defect. It is a manufacturing defect when it is manufactured incorrectly. It is a design defect when it does not meet the design intent or goals.

My boat has a 5/8 - 3/4 hull. I don't intend to park my boat on a reef and test out the "design"

A J24 is about 1,000kg lighter than my boat. I wouldn't park either one on a reef but the J24 gains 20 minutes 100 on me. They were designed for different purpose.

And as to the "all the Lagoon breakups" how about we talk about the sailors in those cases rather than the boat.

I have no affair with Lagoon or need to defend them but I find the Lagoon bashing unfair.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Ex-Calif

If I were buying a boat to regularly park it on a reef then I might consider another boat.

If I buy a Lagoon and I want a light boat that can carry a lot with the caveat that I shouldn't park it on a reef then I may be perfectly fine with it.

You can't really call a design spec a defect. It is a manufacturing defect when it is manufactured incorrectly. It is a design defect when it does not meet the design intent or goals.

My boat has a 5/8 - 3/4 hull. I don't intend to park my boat on a reef and test out the "design"

A J24 is about 1,000kg lighter than my boat. I wouldn't park either one on a reef but the J24 gains 20 minutes 100 on me. They were designed for different purpose.

And as to the "all the Lagoon breakups" how about we talk about the sailors in those cases rather than the boat.

I have no affair with Lagoon or need to defend them but I find the Lagoon bashing unfair.

Im not sure its Lagoon Bashing.
Every company that sell a Catamaran emphasises the strength and confidence in their building techniques.

For half a million dollars or thereabouts, I believe that I would want a slightly stronger hull regardless of where I sailed.

As stated previously, the issue of hull strength is more than likely not confined to Lagoon.

As sailors we all want a lighter vessel, speed, strength and durability, we are told that vessel x or y has it and we part with our money,

When these issues come to light, we are told that it would cost a lot of money to "stiffen up a minimal area".

My advice to the manufacturers is that perhaps if they stopped paying their agents so much money for selling the product and actually put it into the vessel, we might be on the same page. So now all the boat sellers step forward and complain that they dont get enough money etc.......

Do I like Lagoons? yes, one or two models I love intensely. Are they safe? Safe is a relative term. Depends on skippers abilities to keep them safe, but I prefer the word "strong".

Nobody buys a vessel to park them on a reef. In the event it happens, we know a certain type of laminate schedule stands a better chance of holding it together and in the event of a rupture, it would not cause as much damage.

I would not buy a Lagoon 450 to race it. If I took it tropical, I would want it to be reef prepared, coz there is a lot of reefs in the tropics.

Having thought about the subject overnight, I now see that the manufacturers require our input for their cost saving methods/profitability to be perhaps redirected. On the other hand, They were not keen to advertise the below hull situation either.

[robert sailor]

The interesting point I get out of all this is how poorly informed many owners are to how their boats are actually built. As one multi hull salesman remarked "sell the Corian not the core"

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by robert sailor

The interesting point I get out of all this is how poorly informed many owners are to how their boats are actually built. As one multi hull salesman remarked "sell the Corian not the core"

An interesting observation! And I bet they all know about the Corian...

Jim