Monohull or Multihull Sailboat?

[Tropic Cat]

Originally Posted by sneuman

Well, for the record I own a Tayana 37, .

Both Tanya's and Baba's are gorgeous boats and anyone should be proud to own one. If I had to pick a boat to explore Northern Europe, I'd pick yours. Then again, if I had to pick a boat to island jump in the caribbean, I'd pick mine.

[sneuman]

fair enough, I'd probably do the same!

[rexposeidon]

My question to those who know, or better yet, illucidate for the mono-hull knuckledraggers in the group (like myself) the differences in sailing a cat in a weather situation whereas a mono-hull would hunker down under storm tri, and hold on, WWCD (what would a Cat do)? Can a multi-hull heave-to and ride it out? Perhaps more solid information would bring light to this conversation. My thanks in advance.

[2Hulls]

Originally Posted by rexposeidon

Can a multi-hull heave-to and ride it out?

Short answer is that heaving to is no different than a mono - except when it's safer and easier. Multis with boards have more options here. But before doing this, and obviously depending on the "'weather" you're thinking about and the capabilities of the boat, running away from weather is a viable option, towing drogues or warps as needed. I and other owners of my model cat generally eschew storm anchors except as a last resort towards a lee shore.

Of course, you know you're going to hear from the naysayers on this topic.

Dave

[Tropic Cat]

Originally Posted by rexposeidon

Can a multi-hull heave-to and ride it out? Perhaps more solid information would bring light to this conversation. My thanks in advance.

Scroll back through this thread and find the link to the Queen's birthday Storm off the coast of New Zealand in '94. Many boats were involved, both monohulls and catamarans. Seas were recorded at 30 meters and winds in excess of 100 mph. All mono hulls caught in the center of the storm were rolled and dismasted no matter what course of action the crew took. They all found it was impossible to keep these boats from catching seas abeam. Lives were lost on the monohulls. Three catamarans were in this group. All decided to lie ahull. All came through the storm with their masts intact and no injuries. All of these boats were sailable.

This is a long explanation of telling you that ...yes...you can hunker down in a cat.

I find it disturbing that information such as I just typed in this post has been available for 14 years and yet there are still some people who want argue seaworthiness of a cat at sea or haven't taken the time to discover the facts for themselves.

I'm not suggesting you are such a person, but I am suggesting that you do some research and be careful not to solicit opinions. In this way you will discover these facts for yourself.

[sneuman]

[quote=rickm505;146249]Scroll back through this thread and find the link to the Queen's birthday Storm off the coast of New Zealand in '94. Many boats were involved, both monohulls and catamarans. Seas were recorded at 30 meters and winds in excess of 100 mph. All mono hulls caught in the center of the storm were rolled and dismasted no matter what course of action the crew took. They all found it was impossible to keep these boats from catching seas abeam. Lives were lost on the monohulls. Three catamarans were in this group. All decided to lie ahull. All came through the storm with their masts intact and no injuries. All of these boats were sailable.

[quote]

This seems like a bit of a generalization. I respectfully submit that if you read through the account, one of the catamarans, Heart Light, a 41-foot Catalac (with an admittedly green crew), seems to have gotten pretty lucky. Being "catapulted" and "knocked over on one hull" several times, with a cat's AVS, that's a pretty close call indeed:

"They tied off the helm to port and slid sideways down waves. Despite being 'captapulted' (sic) through the air on many occasions and being knocked onto one hull several other times, she endured."

As for the seven monos, the article concludes that:

"had it not been for scuttling or collisions with rescuing ships, six of them would have continued to float. The age-old admonition to never leave a boat until it's underwater would seem as true as ever."

I am willing to give credit where credit is due and say that the cats seem to have done well under the circumstances, but I wouldn't call it a smoking gun in the mono vs. multi debate.

In fact, the authors themselves admit as much: "Does this mean that multihulls are actually safer in very severe weather than monohulls? We ÷ who own both a monohull and a catamaran ÷ certainly wouldn't leap to that conclusion. After all, there were several other monohulls in the core area of the storm that didn't even issue maydays and survived the storm with very little damage."

[Sparohok]

Originally Posted by sneuman

I am willing to give credit where credit is due and say that the cats seem to have done well under the circumstances, but I wouldn't call it a smoking gun in the mono vs. multi debate.

You seem to be saying that one of the catamarans was lucky not to be capsized, whereas six monohulls were unlucky to sink.

I prefer to make my own luck. So, while I agree that the Queen's Birthday Storm isn't quite a smoking gun for multihulls, I think the burden of proof now rests with monos to show that they are as seaworthy as catamarans, rather than vice versa.

[Hud3]

Why is this an important question? We each make a decision as to which boat to buy, and we believe it to be a good decision.

This "mine's better than yours" haggling is pointless.

Who is going to be convinced by page after page of catamaran vs. monohull posts that they made a bad purchase decision?

[sneuman]

[quote=Sparohok;146288]You seem to be saying that one of the catamarans was lucky not to be capsized, whereas six monohulls were unlucky to sink.
[quote]

Except, as I mentioned, that's not what happened.

[ssullivan]

2 Daves, 2 different opinions.

I read somewhere on this board a post from Dave (of Exit Only) where he really put together a nice analysis of running, then of using a sea anchor. His logic seemed pretty tight to me.

I can't agree or disagree with you guys yet... still learning the ways of the multis.

Originally Posted by 2Hulls

Short answer is that heaving to is no different than a mono - except when it's safer and easier. Multis with boards have more options here. But before doing this, and obviously depending on the "'weather" you're thinking about and the capabilities of the boat, running away from weather is a viable option, towing drogues or warps as needed. I and other owners of my model cat generally eschew storm anchors except as a last resort towards a lee shore.

Of course, you know you're going to hear from the naysayers on this topic.

Dave

[Sparohok]

Originally Posted by Hud3

Who is going to be convinced by page after page of catamaran vs. monohull posts that they made a bad purchase decision?

It's an important question because it's not about boat purchases in the past, it's about boat purchases in the future.

[Hud3]

Sparohok,

I understand your point, but this thread's been going on for over five years, and I can't see where any of the participants have been convinced that they would switch "sides" for a future purchase.

[44'cruisingcat]

[quote=sneuman;146270][quote=rickm505;146249]Scroll back through this thread and find the link to the Queen's birthday Storm off the coast of New Zealand in '94. Many boats were involved, both monohulls and catamarans. Seas were recorded at 30 meters and winds in excess of 100 mph. All mono hulls caught in the center of the storm were rolled and dismasted no matter what course of action the crew took. They all found it was impossible to keep these boats from catching seas abeam. Lives were lost on the monohulls. Three catamarans were in this group. All decided to lie ahull. All came through the storm with their masts intact and no injuries. All of these boats were sailable.

This seems like a bit of a generalization. I respectfully submit that if you read through the account, one of the catamarans, Heart Light, a 41-foot Catalac (with an admittedly green crew), seems to have gotten pretty lucky. Being "catapulted" and "knocked over on one hull" several times, with a cat's AVS, that's a pretty close call indeed:

"They tied off the helm to port and slid sideways down waves. Despite being 'captapulted' (sic) through the air on many occasions and being knocked onto one hull several other times, she endured."

As for the seven monos, the article concludes that:

"had it not been for scuttling or collisions with rescuing ships, six of them would have continued to float. The age-old admonition to never leave a boat until it's underwater would seem as true as ever."

I am willing to give credit where credit is due and say that the cats seem to have done well under the circumstances, but I wouldn't call it a smoking gun in the mono vs. multi debate.

In fact, the authors themselves admit as much: "Does this mean that multihulls are actually safer in very severe weather than monohulls? We ÷ who own both a monohull and a catamaran ÷ certainly wouldn't leap to that conclusion. After all, there were several other monohulls in the core area of the storm that didn't even issue maydays and survived the storm with very little damage."

The point is, the three catamarans survived a storm which many would say was not survivable in a cat. They did NOT tip over as many would expect, and in fact were in sailable condition after the storm. (Except for the one intentionally sunk by the rescue ship)

That so many of the monohulls were repeatedly rolled, dismasted and one lost with all hands demonstrates that it was an extreme event, one that again, many would say multihulls would not be up to facing.

The remark about one boat being near to tipping was a subjective observation made by the crew. We will never really know if the boat was actually anywhere near to going over. What we do know is that the boat didn't tip, however close it might have seemed at the time.

[Sparohok]

Originally Posted by Hud3

I understand your point, but this thread's been going on for over five years, and I can't see where any of the participants have been convinced that they would switch "sides" for a future purchase.

Seriously? I know I've learned a lot from reading this thread that will factor into future purchases. Some catamaran owners are former mono owners, some mono owners are former cat owners, so presumably I'm not the only one willing to incorporate new information into their purchases.

Now, whether there's any new information out there that hasn't been hashed out in this thread several times, that's a whole different question. I'll grant you it seems unlikely...

[Hud3]

Originally Posted by Sparohok

S

Now, whether there's any new information out there that hasn't been hashed out in this thread several times, that's a whole different question. I'll grant you it seems unlikely...

I'm with you there! I guess some folks love to argue a point more than I do. Of course, there's a regular turnover in members on the Forum. Always new fodder for the debate!