Do monohulls capsize??

[mike d.]

well said!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by Southern Star

Yes, we all know that multi's can capsize (albeit much less often than monos)

I suspect that the only truth in the phrase in brackets is due to the fact that there are far fewer cats than monos in the world so that the frequency of them capsizing might be less. That even more so in areas of the world with reputations for regular heavy weather as the biggest fleets of multihulls are in the relatively benign tropic and subtropic waters or comparatively sheltered waters.

One thing I am noticing from these threads is that quite a number of multihull owners seem to have far more hang ups over the possibility of capsizing and which capsizes most out of monos and multihulls than mono owners do. I am at a loss as to whether this is due to their being uncertain of their claims of greater stability for multihulls and so need to continually seek reassurance, or some other reason? The possibility of capsize is certainly not a matter that arises very much at all on mono oriented forums.

Again note, as I have said before, I like both monos and multihulls and believe they have their own particular merits.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Sailormann

Monohulls are safer than multihulls....

This is exactly the kind of statement that starts the arguments around here.

Is any evidence presented? No, because none exists.

If YOU, as an individual, FEEL safer in a monohull, fine, say so. I happen to feel MUCH safer in a multihull. Both are probably largely subjective opinions. In reality the statistics (which Hud presented in another thread) indicate there is little real difference in the safety of the two types of boat. Insurance premium comparisons tend to back this up.

however, multihulls do statistically seem to lose significantly fewer people overboard. Which makes sense intuitively. (To me at least)

So while neither BOAT is provably safer, the CREW aboard a multihull can be shown to be safer.

[cptnandy]

"So while neither BOAT is provably safer, the CREW aboard a multihull can be shown to be safer."

Really?
If that is so then why:

"there is little real difference in the safety of the two types of boat. Insurance premium comparisons tend to back this up."

Would it not tend to reason that insurance premiums would be higher for monohulls if your statment is accurate? I mean, after all, wouldn't loss of life will always pay better than loss of property as far as insurance settelments are concerned?

[44'cruisingcat]

When you insure a boat, it doesn't include life insurance cover for the occupants of that boat does it? If someone falls overboard the boat insurance doesn't usually cover them, at least none that I've seen does.

[Alan Wheeler]

Insurance premium comparisons tend to back this up.

Can anyone actually show anything on this? How are the comparisons presented, like dollar value or ease of insurance, or..???

[MidLandOne]

Is pretty much a waste of time making comparisons between drownings off cruising size monos and multis because statistically it is a very low risk.

Here in NZ less than 1% of all recreational drownings are off keelboats or similarly sized multis (less than 1 drowning per year on average) - I suspect that given the high percentage of participants in boating here that figure is higher than in many countries. Here, between 5 and 15 times (varies a lot from year to year) as many drown in road vehicles as do in those boat types.

The number drowned off these vessels is not divided here into those off multis and those off monos because, I suspect, there are so few drowned off either. I also suspect no one sees the need to make such a division because we do not see the silly arguments here over which is best - we tend to just like boats . But I can say that most drownings are off monos here but that only because there are so few multis for anyone to manage to drown themselves off.

Also, the majority of drownings off sailing monos and multis here are off race boats (in fact almost all I can recall in recent years) so the frequency of drownings off cruising boats is far less than the less than 1% I mentioned above - so a very small risk indeed.

Interestingly, a drowning here off a decked power boat(so longer than 6-7m or so) is extremely rare, so if you want to feel safe from drowning get a power boat.

The vast majority of drownings here from boats are from dinghies and non decked boats (so mainly under 6 metres or so) and that is similar to other countries with a high take up of boating (and accounts for the likes of Ireland and Australian states, for example, making life jacket wearing mandatory only on vessels under 7 meters). Why are undecked boats implicated? - because the majority of losses are through swampings.

There are actually slightly fewer drownings here from all recreational sports (which includes things like swimming, duck shooting, crossing streams, etc as well as boating) than there are from all non recreational water based sport causes (eg commercial fishing, motor accidents, falling in while going for a walk, suicide, etc).

For offshore sailing, in the statistics here there are only drownings averaging about 1 or so every 5 years or so - EPIRB intiated offshore rescues are almost always made off the boat, so end up being evacuations rather than ex life raft or water rescues. For offshore, the last losses I am aware of off a sailing vessel offshore having departed NZ were from a trimaran that was lost north of NZ. But I hasten to say that was not a blemish against multihulls, the trimaran was a disaster waiting to happen and if NZ flagged I suspect it would not have been cleared for departure.

And, for the professional doubters - yes, I do have the statistics.

[catty]

Lets make a list

1.Rob James fell off a multi and drowned
2. Eric Tabarly fell off a mono and drowned.

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by Alan Wheeler

Can anyone actually show anything on this? How are the comparisons presented, like dollar value or ease of insurance, or..???

And if anyone can do so I would be interested in any difference between the two for blue water insurance compared to coastal only, and also how that varies for different sailing environments around the world.

[Stranded Mariner]

I have seen more sailors drown in a small glass, than in the big ocean.

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by Stranded Mariner

I have seen more sailors drown in a small glass, than in the big ocean.

But what a way to go .

I have just discovered that my own insurer on its proposal forms specifically asks if the sail boat is a multihull - I assume it is because they give discounts for multihulls .

Maybe I'll give them a call next week and pass on what they say.

[Wotname]

Originally Posted by bstreep

"I'd rather sit on a curb, wacking my toes with a ballpeen hammer".

Yeah, I have reading all week and now I am getting tired of wacking my toes as well, so let me jump in and give the toes a break.

Originally Posted by Alan Wheeler

Many of the discussions above are comparing apples to cabbage.

Wheels, I would go so far as saying some have taken to comparing apples with garbage rather than cabbage. Can't say who 'cause I am sure that is against the rules (and rightly so).

However, some of us seem to think only hard, cold, proven (peer reviewed) facts should be posted while others think that opinions are OK to be shared.

Me, I like them both. Proven facts are great and help me learn. Opinions are great 'cause sometimes I learn something new from them, sometimes I can disagree with them (and be right or wrong as the case may be) and sometimes I can just ignore them and smile knowingly that I am in the pleasant company of a complete idiot. I like friendly intelligent people and I like friendly idiots. Unfriendly ones don't really upset me 'cause mostly I can ignore them. Being here on CF is a bit like being in the yacht club bar - plenty of opinion, some fact, some argument and usually a good night.

Opps, this is a cruising forum, back to the water - one thing I wonder about is that we often extrapolate statistics from racing boats (mono's and multi's) to cruisng boats. I don't think this is helpful (apples to oranges etc) as we wouldn't use statistics from say drag racing or F1 to determine road rules or whatever. Sure some comparisions can be made. Likewise I wonder if insurance actuaries compare multis to monos when deciding premiumes. I suspect they don't, I suspect they look at the risks of each (including costs of repair, replacement, recovery, whatever) and make decisions for that type of vessel. Just like they wouldn't compare say a sailing yacht to a oil tanker. Maybe I am wrong, maybe they do compare multis to monos before setting the premium. Anyone here have some facts to present against my opinion.

As a mono sailor, I expect a knockdown sometime (so far only had one) with the possibility of a roll-over always present. I plan to make the boat seaworthy enough to self right and jury rig if neccessary to get home. Some of my mono friends don't do that, they plan around being lucky enough for this not to happen to them.

I have multi friends who know that should they capsize, they will probably stay inverted. They plan to make the boat seaworthy enough to remain floating and have suitable measures to summons help. Likewise some multi sailors plan around being lucky enough to not capsize.

The point being we can't compare careless mono sailor to a careful multi sailor or vice versa.

I think that is 2 cents worth, back to banging my toes.

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by cptnandy

..."there is little real difference in the safety of the two types of boat. Insurance premium comparisons tend to back this up."

Would it not tend to reason that insurance premiums would be higher for monohulls if your statment is accurate? I mean, after all, wouldn't loss of life will always pay better than loss of property as far as insurance settelments are concerned?

There is an applicable discussion of yacht insurance at:
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ry-3190-2.html

Which was based on the ”Caribbean Compass” (January 2006) article
FROM THE YACHT CLAIMS DESK ~ BY GUY MATTHEWS
Yacht Insurance Underwriting
Complete article at: Yacht Insurance Underwriting

In which the author concludes*:

"... There are certain truisms apparent to the occupant of the Yacht Claims Desk, many of which can incite violent arguments if restated in polite company. These certainties, experience-based rather than theoretical, are listed below in no particular order.
· Wood yachts are today generally poor insurance risks
· Fiberglass is the most practical construction material today for yachts less than 60 feet in length.
· Steel and aluminum yachts, while often better constructed, are more difficult and costly to repair due to the lack of skilled technicians and facilities.
· Lighting damage is one of the most commonly occurring losses in the tropics.
· Lightning diffusers and diverters have no provable effect on lightning strike occurrences.
· Notwithstanding their growing popularity, catamarans are more exposed to loss than monohulls. Experience indicates that the catamaran is more likely to sustain a lightning strike; the catamaran is more exposed to dismasting than other vessels; the beam of the catamaran makes secure mooring more difficult to obtain; catamarans present a significant capsizing risk. (Any vessel with an escape hatch in the hull bottom should be viewed with concern.); the stability of the catamaran makes it popular with those with less than extensive seagoing skills; ad infinitum
· Older boats are more exposed to rigging failures hence the need for periodic rigging surveys;
· Rigging surveys should be conducted before ocean passages
· Carbon fiber mast and hulls are extremely expensive and difficult to repair.
· Theft is a risk which can be managed by restrictive policy conditions.
· Dinghies and tenders should not be covered by insurance when under tow.
· Gasoline-powered boats are more dangerous than diesel-powered boats.
· Every vessel in tropical waters (mainland and islands) should have a real world-workable hurricane protection plan.
· Sails or yacht canvas items left in place in a named wind storm increase the likelihood of damage to the vessel and should not be subject to insurance coverage.
· Trimarans and vessels built of ferro-cement are generally very poor insurance risks.
· Speed is a factor in powerboat loss occurrences - the higher the speed the more likely an operating loss.
· The insuring of charter boats in competitive regattas should be undertaken with extreme care.
· Typical charter boat damage deposits do not adequately respond to the increased risk in regattas.
· Fixed-fee yacht deliveries create an increased potential for loss.
· Single-handed operation of yachts on ocean voyages increases the potential for loss.
· Charterers are no more likely to imperil the safety of a charter vessel than are members of the general boating public to imperil a private vessel.
· There is difference in loss exposure and reparability among vessels by various manufacturers.
· The yacht survey is generally inclined to reflect the view of the party paying for the survey.
· The most important factor: there is no substitute for competent and experienced seamanship.
There is no magic yacht underwriting bullet. No two yacht risks are the same and successful underwriting of each risk is a skill developed by experience."

* Please don't hold me responsible for the opinions expressed by Guy Mathews.

[sneuman]

there's much more than just a semantic difference between a "knockdown" and a "capsize"

I was knocked down (i.e., over 80-90 degrees) twice in survival conditions in a monohull, but never capsized (180+). Had I been in a multi, I am quite sure it would have been the real thing.

*Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of other moderators or the management of cruisersforum.com

[cooper]

Some basics ..again.

MY diatribe is based on "normal" cruising boats. NOT racing or experimental of either type. (we can all find exceptions)

A cat gains its initial stability from "form stability"...that is its wide beam.

A mono gains its stability from some " form stability" and "ballasted stability"

If the mast on a cat reaches a situation that it is parallel to the horizon it no longer has any "form stability"..THIS is exactly the same situation as a mono.(except)...

The righting moment is then supplied only by what is on the other side of the centre of gravity point.

If both boats continue rolling till the mast touches the water, the cg moves ever downwards.

At this point large amounts of both boats hulls then start to influence the tendency to completely turn over.

This is important BECAUSE up an till this point WIND on SAILS can make this happen.

To reiterate....A "knock down" through WIND alone can put both boats in this situation.

A cat will most likely be past its gz curve of stability and continue to roll.

A mono wont. (from the wind)

I say a cat will because for it to be in the same situation AS A MONO IT MUST BE BALLASTED TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE GZ CURVE GIVEN ITS LARGER BEAM.

A cat gets its "safety" because it is far less likely to be "knocked over" by the wind. AND far less likely to be broached by a breaking wave due to its larger beam AND less deep keel (tripping) form.

A mono gets its "safety" because it has a greater propensity to self right after a knock down.

And finally...
when either boat is upside down and th gz is against you............
1. the less the beam the less "upside down form stability" the more chance of righting IF you have weight on the other side of the boat.
2. Those rounded protruding coach roofs..? They may be ugly and an added windage, but they , when inverted provide "curved positive buoyancy" They will roll with the waves and whatever is sticking up in the wind. Because a full curve has NO form stability. It is for this very reason that hard core Coast guard boats require volume calculated deck structures.The hope is that water or wind movement will move the vessel into an angle that will allow gravity to take over and self right.

By virtue of the design the above is not possible in a cat.

Finally REMEMBER...the choice of OFF shore rescue boats is in the cat form. The Australian shark cat has been exported all around the world.
The reason is simple...ITS FORM STABILITY IS WAY BETTER THAN A MONO.....

IT DOSNT HAVE A MAST.....

Where the extreme possibility of rolling is present, these boats are monos with raised super structures.