Cata sank in the Caribbean on Sunday 24/01

[monte]

I'm pretty sure the girl would have some positive effect on buoyancy....

[Cormorant]

Another case where a few hundred bucks worth of equipment would make a big difference: one DSC handheld, one PLB. . . .

Not that anyone in this case died for the lack of these items, but in an panicky situation, it would be a lot easier just to hit the red button rather than try to read off lat/long and transmit by voice.

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by smj

Brave words from a man with a Hunter😆

smj,
These comments are not only rude and insensitive but, infantile at best. To criticize a sailor's choice of a vessel: an object that is perhaps his most intimate connection other than human is pathetic. What is your logic and intent for that remark? If a man owns a Hunter-- he is not brave, smart, competent? Somehow flawed? You, my friend, need to get a life. Or perhaps, your life is based upon telling others what type of boat you own? May I be the first CF member to apologize to AKPRB for your insensitive remarks. Criticizing someone's boat adds nothing to a conversation and the boat you own says nothing about the quality and character of its owner.

[smj]

Originally Posted by rognvald

smj,

These comments are not only rude and insensitive but, infantile at best. To criticize a sailor's choice of a vessel: an object that is perhaps his most intimate connection other than human is pathetic. What is your logic and intent for that remark? If a man owns a Hunter-- he is not brave, smart, competent? Somehow flawed? You, my friend, need to get a life. Or perhaps, your life is based upon telling others what type of boat you own? May I be the first CF member to apologize to AKPRB for your insensitive remarks. Criticizing someone's boat adds nothing to a conversation and the boat you own says nothing about the quality and character of its owner.

I'm sorry you have no sense of humor. He made a derogatory comment about catamarans which I took as humor as the seaworthiness of catamarans is usually a hot topic on CF. I came back and made a derogatory comment on Hunters which was supposed to be humorous, as let's face it, Hunters take a beating on this forum as much as catamarans. The smiley face at the end of my post should have been a dead giveaway.
Your post calling me rude, insensitive, infantile, pathetic and need to get a life was no less juvenile than what you perceived my post to be.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[rognvald]

Originally Posted by smj

I'm sorry you have no sense of humor. He made a derogatory comment about catamarans which I took as humor as the seaworthiness of catamarans is usually a hot topic on CF. I came back and made a derogatory comment on Hunters which was supposed to be humorous, as let's face it, Hunters take a beating on this forum as much as catamarans. The smiley face at the end of my post should have been a dead giveaway.
Your post calling me rude, insensitive, infantile, pathetic and need to get a life was no less juvenile than what you perceived my post to be.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

smj,
I did not perceive his remark as critical of catamarans but rather a common notion/observation about their behaviour once they invert/sink. Perhaps the enigmatic "smiley face?" you added was misconstrued but, he did not personally attack you or your vessel so . . . why did you criticise his boat? Perhaps others will agree with your defense. However, your intent was clear to me and it could be in no way considered to be appropriate. Best, Rognvald

[smj]

Originally Posted by rognvald

smj,

I did not perceive his remark as critical of catamarans but rather a common notion/observation about their behaviour once they invert/sink. Perhaps the enigmatic "smiley face?" you added was misconstrued but, he did not personally attack you or your vessel so . . . why did you criticise his boat? Perhaps others will agree with your defense. However, your intent was clear to me and it could be in no way considered to be appropriate. Best, Rognvald

Maybe I misinterpreted his post as you misinterpreted mine. Don't tell me what my intent was as you obviously don't know. I have nothing against Hunters but realize they are bashed here almost or as often as catamarans, thus my humorous post. We have owned catamarans for almost 25 years and the fact that they remain awash just below the water when inverted is a new one to me, let alone a common notion/observation.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[rognvald]

"We have owned catamarans for almost 25 years and the fact that they remain awash just below the water when inverted is a new one to me, let alone a common notion/observation." smj

smj,
I thought this is a major selling point of catamarans? They don't usually sink. Was AKPRB incorrect? Best, Rognvald

[smj]

Originally Posted by rognvald

"We have owned catamarans for almost 25 years and the fact that they remain awash just below the water when inverted is a new one to me, let alone a common notion/observation." smj



smj,

I thought this is a major selling point of catamarans? They don't usually sink. Was AKPRB incorrect? Best, Rognvald

AKPRB said it floated just below the sea surface. Maybe some float just at the sea surface but I well designed cat should float like this.



Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Southern Star]

I too have never heard of holed, or capsized catamarans floating just below the surface.
What is the basis for suggesting that that this is a 'common notion/observation'? In the absence of some evidence that this is a frequent occurence, it is an unfair comment about catamarans in general. In the result, I took SMJ's response (ended with a Smiley) as a rather clever retort to someone who no doubt has also experienced the often unfair barbs written about his choice of boats. Not an attack, but a light-hearted touche.

Brad

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by smj

AKPRB said it floated just below the sea surface. Maybe some float just at the sea surface but I well designed cat should float like this.
Attachment 117764


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Seems to me that you have to distinguish between an intact cat that has, for some reason, become inverted and one that is "sinking" because of being holed or otherwise flooded. The one you show appears to be of the former situation.

If you consider the distribution of flotation volume vs weight distribution in an inverted or flooded cruising cat (one with big engines and lots of heavy gear), it is likely that they will float bows up, sterns down if flooded, either right side up or inverted. We've had various pix of such posted here on CF, and it is what Derek Kelsal has posited in an earlier post in this thread. If the loading is sufficient, it will in fact sink. In either case, it will not make a very good platform for survival, especially in rough conditions, so a life raft is still a good idea. The larger visual target of an inverted but bows up cat means an aerial searcher will be more likely to find the raft if it remains nearby, FWTW.

None the less, when holed even heavy cruising cats have a far better chance of remaining afloat than ballasted monos (with a few rare exceptions) .

Jim

[Palarran]

14 posts before the first monohuller made the half joke and then turned the tread into a multi-basher-defender. Never changes does it but 14 was pretty good, it's usually less.

Who cares about the semantics, most likely the boat is lost and the crew is safe. What is always good to know is what the cause was.

[smj]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Seems to me that you have to distinguish between an intact cat that has, for some reason, become inverted and one that is "sinking" because of being holed or otherwise flooded. The one you show appears to be of the former situation.



If you consider the distribution of flotation volume vs weight distribution in an inverted or flooded cruising cat (one with big engines and lots of heavy gear), it is likely that they will float bows up, sterns down if flooded, either right side up or inverted. We've had various pix of such posted here on CF, and it is what Derek Kelsal has posited in an earlier post in this thread. If the loading is sufficient, it will in fact sink. In either case, it will not make a very good platform for survival, especially in rough conditions, so a life raft is still a good idea. The larger visual target of an inverted but bows up cat means an aerial searcher will be more likely to find the raft if it remains nearby, FWTW.



None the less, when holed even heavy cruising cats have a far better chance of remaining afloat than ballasted monos (with a few rare exceptions) .



Jim

If you look closely, both the sterns of the pictured cat appeared to be holed. I do agree though, the amount of weight put in modern day cruising cats does seem to affect their positive buoyancy! As far as a catamaran remaining just below the surface of the water?..".........


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[smj]

Originally Posted by Southern Star

I too have never heard of holed, or capsized catamarans floating just below the surface.
What is the basis for suggesting that that this is a 'common notion/observation'? In the absence of some evidence that this is a frequent occurence, it is an unfair comment about catamarans in general. In the result, I took SMJ's response (ended with a Smiley) as a rather clever retort to someone who no doubt has also experienced the often unfair barbs written about his choice of boats. Not an attack, but a light-hearted touche.

Brad

Thanks Brad, maybe you've read enough of my posts to become used to my misaligned sense of humor!


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[chuckr]

ANYONE know WHY the boat sank? A learning time here. What happened??

[Blackie Swart]

"Cats sinking" is like an incident with a shark is called a "shark attack" but with a dog it's called a "dog bite" so it depends on whose talking as to how they see it.