Large Cat Flipped off Niue

[boatsmith]

Originally Posted by thinwater

No, not really, they were not really reefed. The Atlantic is a high performance boat with a big rig. The first reef is not so much less than other boats that size under working sail. My last cat fell in the "high performance" category and I knew my first reef only took me back into the cruiser range. Most cruisers, I think, would have had 2 reefs in, or they would have been on-deck and off auto pilot.

Some had said that is not realistic for cruisers. I would counter it is not realistic for all cruisers. It is part of the mutihull trade off, and for cruisers that are not willing to accept those differences, they really should not buy one. That is OK. They are not for everyone. Really, I wish the manufacturers were better about saying that.

VERY well put

[boatsmith]

I think that these numbers could be more accurately compared if you also provided weight, beam and rig height as well.

[tsmwebb]

Originally Posted by boatsmith

I think that these numbers could be more accurately compared if you also provided weight, beam and rig height as well.

I was answering a direct question with the pertinent facts. I did post links to the specs so you can dig the numbers out if you like. The Google is your friend. Sadly the critical displacement number is totally unreliable (why is it okay for boat builders to lie about displacement?). So, one quickly gets to GIGO. The short story is the A57 has a bit less heeling moment (less SA on a lower rig but with more water draft) and a bit less righting moment than the L57 (somewhat less disp on a similar effective beam). The L57 is a luxury cruiser and the A57 is a bit more powered up and efficient performance cruiser but when compared to a full on racing mulit like an ORMA 60 or even the somewhat less insane multi 50 class both boats are very conservatively rigged.

Tom

[Factor]

Originally Posted by Joli

With one on watch? Where do you go, the helm or the sheet?

Both - well you can on my boat. And I would think you could on an atlantic

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by Factor

... There are three issues to safety irrespective of hull numbers or design

Engineering - how well is the boat designed, how well have loads and stresses been considered and calculated how well has the sail plan been thought through, not just for performance but for balance and for ease of handling. (I have been on boats where the owner has never reefed and doesn't know how after owning the boat for years). On a cat is there sufficient bridgedeck clearance and the like, on a tri is there sufficient float volume to resist pitchpoling, etc etc.

Construction - how well has the engineering been actualised. Have systems been tested correctly etc

Use - how competent is the sailor and how dedicated is he/she to managing risk. I see a squall line , I watch and be ready to reef early, I watch and be ready to take active sailing decisions.

Indeed!

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by tsmwebb

I was answering a direct question with the pertinent facts. I did post links to the specs so you can dig the numbers out if you like. The Google is your friend. Sadly the critical displacement number is totally unreliable (why is it okay for boat builders to lie about displacement?). So, one quickly gets to GIGO. The short story is the A57 has a bit less heeling moment (less SA on a lower rig but with more water draft) and a bit less righting moment than the L57 (somewhat less disp on a similar effective beam). The L57 is a luxury cruiser and the A57 is a bit more powered up and efficient performance cruiser but when compared to a full on racing mulit like an ORMA 60 or even the somewhat less insane multi 50 class both boats are very conservatively rigged.

Tom

Tom was replying to me, I believe, and I should have researched those numbers before I made my post; the 2 boats are more similar than I had in my memory. It is seem clear, from the numbers, that the A57 is much closer to cruising cats in general, than to pure racing machines.

There is still a kernel of truth in my statement that one reef an a small jib was not enough for that boat; great ships can be laid low by hurricane force gusts. In the face of an ugly squall line you either need to be sailing reasonably close to the wind with sails well reefed and a hand on the sheets, or under bare poles.

[tsmwebb]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Tom was replying to me, I believe, and I should have researched those numbers before I made my post; the 2 boats are more similar than I had in my memory. It is seem clear, from the numbers, that the A57 is much closer to cruising cats in general, than to pure racing machines.

Re-reading my post it came out way grumpier than I had intended. Sorry about that.

There is still a kernel of truth in my statement that one reef an a small jib was not enough for that boat; great ships can be laid low by hurricane force gusts. In the face of an ugly squall line you either need to be sailing reasonably close to the wind with sails well reefed and a hand on the sheets, or under bare poles.

I think there is more than just a kernel of truth in what you say. They capsized after all. I think the problem is largely one of degree. Offshore weather is seldom ideal and if you want to get anywhere you have to be able to keep moving most of the time in fair weather and foul but one still has to sail safely. Sometimes that does mean going very slowly or stopping. That can be frustrating and recognizing the risks and having the discipline to sail safely are skills that all offshore sailors need to develop in the face of a modern tendency to constantly progress along schedules. There is a level of judgment and of patience that must be exercised to navigate safely.

Tom

[DoubleWhisky]

The phrase „The cat sailing is different” is repeating in this thread and for good reason.
Myself I’m sailing monohulls all my life, but I made one longer passage on the cat – Baltic to Eastern Med in wintertime – as a crew on Sunreef 72. Lesson learned was that – being the long term skipper on monohulls – I’m nothing more than half qualified crew on the multihull.
I love the multis – for being the marvel of enginnering, for their speed, for their sheer power, but I most probably will never own or skipper one, just because I’m not willing enough to follow the whole necessary learning curve again from scratch.

I do not know anything about situation in America or down under, but here in Europe all standard learning curve is monohull orientated. One normally start from sailing dinghies and work his way up – in most cases from monohull to bigger monohull. Additionally - I do not know any official sail training scheme including specific multihull training.
At least, there are not so much of multihulls around as monohulls – except for charter fleets.

And cat charter fleets are specific – here at least.
First: boats are rather heavy – in opposition to true multi spirit. The reason is simple – the charter operators are influential players on the market (they purchase – under different schemes – great part of production cats) and they don’t care about weight. They care about comfort and foolproofness of the boats, so the rather heavy construction suits them well.
I’m not sure about the data from the link provided by tsmwebb for Lagoon 57, but the Lagoon 560, now in production, is much heavier than Atlantic 57.
Up to Lagoon official site max. load displacement (CE) (probably standing for: max. load displacement for Category A (Ocean) according to CE RCD) is 61740 Lbs. Deducting from this something between 17.000 Lbs. and 22.000 Lbs. for the weights calculated according the RCD for max.load we are coming to the figure of 40.000 Lbs. – 45.000 Lbs. lightship, at least 50 % (most probably 66 %) more than Atlantic 57.
Second: charter cats are often depowered. It is easy for charter operator to specify a little undersized rigging and/or to order the main with smaller roach and flatter, somewhat smaller jib, to the to the effect of the boat depowered to the “first reef in” state.

I do not have any contacts between multihull producers, but I know a lot of people involved in charter business, and heard a lot of times, that the decision to charter the cat is very often heavily influenced by non-qulified SWMBO. The reasons are obvious – not heeling, good platform for domestic life, abundance of volume, sheer size of sunbathing space and so on. Probably too often such a charter (or charters) is the first and only introduction to cat sailing, before the decision is made to buy one. And this introduction charter is mostly made on heavy, underpowered cat, in the sailing area known for being rather not overly squally – Eastern Med.

I can not be sure, but somehow I do not believe that producer of more performance oriented multihulls, approached by prospective client, will dare to say: “Our boats are wonderful Sir, and you will be happy as an owner of one. You only need to spend a season or two sailing Hobie Cats intensively, then one or two crewing on some bigger multis and be back with us to place Your order”.

I don’t think there is any problem with multihulls, but I suppose it is growing problem regarding many of the people sailing them.

Anyway – the multis are probably quite safe boats. Not so many of them inverted...

[tsmwebb]

Originally Posted by DoubleWhisky

...
I’m not sure about the data from the link provided by tsmwebb for Lagoon 57, but the Lagoon 560, now in production, is much heavier than Atlantic 57.
Up to Lagoon official site max. load displacement (CE) (probably standing for: max. load displacement for Category A (Ocean) according to CE RCD) is 61740 Lbs. Deducting from this something between 17.000 Lbs. and 22.000 Lbs. for the weights calculated according the RCD for max.load we are coming to the figure of 40.000 Lbs. – 45.000 Lbs. lightship, at least 50 % (most probably 66 %) more than Atlantic 57.

Good points and I'm skeptical of the displacement data in the links too. And your L56 data is interesting (the CE max load displacement sounds like a standard but I'm not familiar with it). However, I'd be careful assuming the A57 sails at anything like the weight listed on Chris' site either. That's a design displacement at an unspecified load condition. I would not be amazed to find that it doesn't include the weight of quite a lot of typically installed equipment and is light ship as well. So, yes the L57/56 are almost certainly heavier than the A57 and doubtlessly the truth is somewhere between the 10% difference in published light loads and the much greater difference you are suggesting. Unless you are using weights calculated using the same standard or actual load cell weights there is no way to make a valid comparison. As I said originally, GIGO (garbage in garbage out).

Anyway – the multis are probably quite safe boats. Not so many of them inverted...

Yes, it is the norm for monohull sailors make the transition to multis safely. It doesn't seem to me that there is a significant body of casualty evidence to suggest that competent mono sailors need substantial additional training/learning to sail cruising multis safely.

Tom

[hummingway]

Originally Posted by tsmwebb

Yes, it is the norm for monohull sailors make the transition to multis safely. It doesn't seem to me that there is a significant body of casualty evidence to suggest that competent mono sailors need substantial additional training/learning to sail cruising multis safely.

Tom

I wondered about that. From what I've read it seems the main thing is you lose the feedback that warns you of sailing to close to the edge? Trim and shape of sails, helm and so on don't change do they? Of course that log I narrowly miss with my 14 foot beam might require a little more room with a 30 foot beam

[tsmwebb]

Originally Posted by hummingway

I wondered about that. From what I've read it seems the main thing is you lose the feedback that warns you of sailing to close to the edge? Trim and shape of sails, helm and so on don't change do they? Of course that log I narrowly miss with my 14 foot beam might require a little more room with a 30 foot beam

Good question. But, not a simple one. Maybe worthy of its own thread? Multis, like monos come in so many different types that I hate to generalize beyond the fact there doesn't seem to be a high incidence of problems with new to multi monohull sailors. It might be fun to discuss specific experiences making the change. As for log avoidance, remember there's a space between the hulls .

Tom

[hummingway]

I started a thread for the discussion on transitioning from Mono to Multi sailing:

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...tml#post565602

[Southern Star]

I agree with Tom, I haven't found the transition from mono to multi to be difficult and, I do not believe that many have found it to be so. No, the feedback is not as good/instantaneous as the sudden increase in heeling/weather helm that is experienced in most monohulls when overpowered; however, even on monohulls experience had already taught me to be a 'conservative' sailor, finding it eaiser to put in a reef before you needed it, rather than after.

Docking? Yes, there are differences - some huge advantages due to the twin diesels, but also a disadvantage (particularly in cats) as they tend to be impacted more by crosswinds. As to the increased beam - you get used to it pretty quickly, actually.

The only other substantial difference, IMO, is that there are occasions when you are better to bear off when overpowered, rather than head up (when on a beam reach or below). Still, even if this is not immediately second nature, when in heavy conditions it is always wise to think through the possibilities, your expected course of action and then share them with the crew.

As to other differences - e.g., being able to fly a pole-less symmetrical spinnaker from the bows, being able to move about/cook without significant heeling, being able to enter/exit the companionway without having to deal with a sharply angled ladder - those things took no time at all to adjust to!

Brad

[beiland]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Winds jumping from 20 to 60 knots are pretty common around thunderstorms. If that could knock over every cat, we'd hear about it--most crews have reduced sail by the time the 60 knot blast hits.

We did hit something similar one year on the way from Easter Island to Pitcairn. We were reaching in 20 knots when we listened to Herb give the weather to a boat 60 miles in front of us. The boat told Herb that they had just blown out their mainsail when a 60 knot gust hit. Herb said "yes, I see a sharp front on the satellite picture--did you see lightning just before it hit?" They said yes, and I popped up out of the hatch to see lightning on the horizon. Double reefed the main, rolled up the genoa, and in 15 minutes we had the full 60 knots too. Not that common in the South Pacific tradewind areas, but they do occur.

Note that while the unprepared boat did have some damage, it didn't need assistance--you guessed right--it was a monohull, and they are more definitely more foregiving in sudden gusts.

I know this goes back awhile in your memory banks, but do you recall how much of a shift in direction that 'big wind' came from compared to the reaching direction you had been sailing in??

[beiland]

Originally Posted by Joli

Over the course of 35 years and 100k miles of racing sailboats I've probably sailed through 100's of these squalls. During these times we've been suprised maybe 6~10 times with very high winds that seemed to come out of no where. After you recover and pull the spreaders back up out of the water you look at each other and say where the hell did that come from.

Wondering if you might like to contribute some of your experiences with "SUDDEN wind shifts' to this subject thread:
Understanding the Wind - Boat Design Forums