Does anybody know any more details on this incident?

[Paul L]

Accordig to Rousmaniere's estimate "....38 boats were actually rolled over entirely, 1/8 of the entire Fastnet fleet experianced the catastrophe of a complete capsize" . A total of 5 boats sunk, with 19 abandoned and recovered.

Paul L

[44'cruisingcat]

The only reason this thread even exists is because that cat is still floating. If it were a mono, what would there be? A photo of an empty patch of water where it was last seen?

[delmarrey]

Maybe I should merge this thread with all the other multi vs mono threads and ya'll can just hash it all out on one single thread continusally without progress.

[David_Old_Jersey]

Originally Posted by delmarrey

Maybe I should merge this thread with all the other multi vs mono threads and ya'll can just hash it all out on one single thread continusally without progress.

No!!

Merge it intsead with the "I Love Guns" thread and the Bumfrazzle "I Love myself" thread

[Lodesman]

Paul,

I think Rousmaniere overestimated if he figures there were 14 boats that rolled entirely and the crews stayed with them - maybe he's including knockdowns. Anyway, there were 5 that sank and the 19 that remained floating certainly were no more habitable than an inverted cat. Getting back to the topic - has anyone heard of a mono being hit by a waterspout; what then was the result?

Kevin

[Paul L]

Kevin,
His numbers are for full rolls, not knock downs. There were many more knock downs of the 600+ boats. I don't know why you'd question his numbers. They are from an extensive survey sent to all boats who participated in the race. Most of the crew did stay on the rolled boats. They were fully crewed race boats, typically 6 or more crew. At the rolls and knock downs some crew were below decks and others on deck were tethered in. There were a few cases of tethers failing. This has lead to significantly improved harness and tether designs.
I guess I shouldn't have stuck my nose into this thread. I was just responding to your comment on mono's that I felt was incorrect. And I followed up with some facts to back it up. I personally do not think that a cat, tri or mono is safer than the other. When looking at some of the major yachting catastrophes where many boats were caught in similar conditions, the results do not show any safety factor associated with multi-hulls vs monos. The main criteria is skipper experience, crew experience and size, and the length of the boat. More experienced skippers, with crews large enough to use active storm tactics and bigger boats tend to do better in extreme storms. I don't see anything that isn't logical about that statement. I believe it holds for monos just as well as it holds for multi-hulls. If I was in extreme storm conditions, I'd prefer to be on a mono because that is where I have most of my experience. Someone equally experienced in multi-hulls would no doubt do as well as I would.

Paul L

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by delmarrey

Maybe I should merge this thread with all the other multi vs mono threads and ya'll can just hash it all out on one single thread continusally without progress.

It seems to happen a lot doesn't it? For some reason it doesn't seem to happen in the monohull part of the forum. You don't see multihull enthusiasts going over there posting pictures of upturned mono's or stories about mono's that have sunk, yet some "mono people" seem to spend hours searching the internet for photo's of capsised cats and tri's so they can post them here as if to prove some kind of point.

I wonder why that is?

And then there's the "Iv'e never been on a multihull, or even seen one, but I read somewhere about one that broke up in 1953 so I think they are really dangerous." type. Most of us who own or are building multihulls have actually owned and/or sailed on monohulls, and knowing that EVERYTHING has it's pro's and con's we have decided that FOR US the pro's of multihulls compared to monohulls outweigh the con's.

That doesn't mean we are absolutely right, but it doesn't mean we are absolutely wrong either.

[delmarrey]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

It seems to happen a lot doesn't it? For some reason it doesn't seem to happen in the monohull part of the forum. You don't see multihull enthusiasts going over there posting pictures of upturned mono's or stories about mono's that have sunk, yet some "mono people" seem to spend hours searching the internet for photo's of capsised cats and tri's so they can post them here as if to prove some kind of point.

I wonder why that is?

Do you think it might be because SOME are claiming that Multi's don't go over.

That's been photoshopped, cats don't capsize!

I know this was only in jest but it's on going. Some see arrogance in it and rebuff. If ya'll cut out the arrogance then the "Trying to prove you wrong" will go away. But that's going to be hard because it's documented all over this board, on both sides.

And you have to admit, once a cat goes over it's there to stay until it's hauled back in. And that is the biggest fear of prospective buyers.

Ever boat has it's +'s and -'s Mono's can't go in the shallow's or be beached. Inflatable’s have to stay away from coral. Tri's have less room below decks, Powerboats eat fuel, and so on.

We're not here to state I'm better then you! Were here because of a common interest and to help each other with projects and learning. Arrogance is a down hill slide. Any time someone states they're better, they're going to get resistance. And that's what all these pictures are all about.

Most of the mono pictures are of hurricanes and of being washed up on the beaches. I've only seen one picture of a mono turtled and it lost its keel.

So, if we cut out the false statements, on both sides, criticism will deplete. Agreed???

[unbusted67]

I absolutley agree with what you are saying about this. Check out my thread "no right way, right?" it is about this same argument.John Rusmarniereewhatever is a smart dude and did his research on this stuff.
I think something like 30% of all boats were knocked down in that race.

Originally Posted by Paul L

Kevin,
His numbers are for full rolls, not knock downs. There were many more knock downs of the 600+ boats. I don't know why you'd question his numbers. They are from an extensive survey sent to all boats who participated in the race. Most of the crew did stay on the rolled boats. They were fully crewed race boats, typically 6 or more crew. At the rolls and knock downs some crew were below decks and others on deck were tethered in. There were a few cases of tethers failing. This has lead to significantly improved harness and tether designs.
I guess I shouldn't have stuck my nose into this thread. I was just responding to your comment on mono's that I felt was incorrect. And I followed up with some facts to back it up. I personally do not think that a cat, tri or mono is safer than the other. When looking at some of the major yachting catastrophes where many boats were caught in similar conditions, the results do not show any safety factor associated with multi-hulls vs monos. The main criteria is skipper experience, crew experience and size, and the length of the boat. More experienced skippers, with crews large enough to use active storm tactics and bigger boats tend to do better in extreme storms. I don't see anything that isn't logical about that statement. I believe it holds for monos just as well as it holds for multi-hulls. If I was in extreme storm conditions, I'd prefer to be on a mono because that is where I have most of my experience. Someone equally experienced in multi-hulls would no doubt do as well as I would.

Paul L

[unbusted67]

Oh and I forgot, I am better than everyone and so is my quatrohulled boat that not only won't capsize but can fly.

Originally Posted by delmarrey

We're not here to state I'm better then you! Were here because of a common interest and to help each other with projects and learning. Arrogance is a down hill slide. Any time someone states they're better, they're going to get resistance. And that's what all these pictures are all about.


So, if we cut out the false statements, on both sides, criticism will deplete. Agreed???

At the risk of getting hit by a stray stone or two, When you search for that perfect boat, what do you have on your list? A solid hull? proven design? Good rig? Reliable engine? Interior accomodations?
Who includes on their list how many boats like the one you like have sunk or pitchpoled?
Those who choose multi hulls do so for a reason, as do those who choose monos. It may be the speed or stability for the multis, or the traditional proven design of the mono, but it is a choice based on the needs of the person choosing the boat.
So, how can anyone consider the choice of a mono or multi to be any more or less responsible than the choice of fiberglass over steel, or a ketch over a cutter?
Neither is better for everyone, but each is ideal for someone. The argument is really pointless. If you are a committed mono hull person, there is nothing I could say to convince you a multi is better.
As we sit here saying "No surprise, that is what Multi hulls do.", those outside the sailing world are looking in saying "Those fools out there in storms and seas must be crazy." They could care less if it is a mono or a multi. It is all subjective, so why fall in to the trap? Shouldn't we, as a cruising community, step beyond that, and discuss the implications of a boat in a water spout, rather than picking on a boat that would likely have had an equal chance of surviving those conditions to any other boat out there?

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by delmarrey

Do you think it might be because SOME are claiming that Multi's don't go over.

And you have to admit, once a cat goes over it's there to stay until it's hauled back in. And that is the biggest fear of prospective buyers.

Ever boat has it's +'s and -'s Mono's can't go in the shallow's or be beached. Inflatable’s have to stay away from coral. Tri's have less room below decks, Powerboats eat fuel, and so on.

We're not here to state I'm better then you! Were here because of a common interest and to help each other with projects and learning. Arrogance is a down hill slide. Any time someone states they're better, they're going to get resistance. And that's what all these pictures are all about.

Most of the mono pictures are of hurricanes and of being washed up on the beaches. I've only seen one picture of a mono turtled and it lost its keel.

So, if we cut out the false statements, on both sides, criticism will deplete. Agreed???

For a start I don't think anyone is claiming multi's don't go over. What they are saying is that the vast majority of capsises are race boats involved in races.

Yes, once a cat goes over it's there to stay. (Except for very small cats) Once a monohull sinks it's usually permanent too.

And many of the post do seem to say exactly that - we (monohulls) are better (safer etc) than you (multihulls).

Yes, most monohull "disaster" photo's are of them washed up on beaches etc - simply because it's much more difficult to photograph a boat that has sunk.

Off the top of my head I can think of at least four mono's that 180'd and stayed that way. (2 of which were in a race) There was Tony Bullimore's boat, Elizabeth Autissiere's boat (one of them had lost it's keel, but the other still had it attached, I can't remember which.), Rising Farrster, off the NSW coast, where I think 2 lives were lost, and one recently off South Africa, where sadly an entire family was lost.
However I have no intention of posting any photo's of these in a monohull thread and saying something like "see told you so!" or "gee this must be a fake because that never happens!"

The fact is, usually when a monohull goes down, there is nothing left to photograph. And sadly, sometimes no-one left to tell about it.

[Lodesman]

Paul,

My original remark was said tongue-in-cheek; kind of a foil to Joli's sarcasm. Many who follow the multi board are well aware of Joli's prejudices against cats. I haven't read Rousmaniere's take on Fastnet - I'm just shocked so many crews would stay with their crippled boats with a storm ongoing, when the rescue ships are there. No boat goes through a barrel-roll unscathed, and from what I read they didn't have storm drogues or para-anchors, or much at all in the way of survival gear. From the figures you provided 38 rolled, 5 of those sank, 19 were abandoned (which seems the sensible option, especially as they recovered their boats later) - so that leaves 14. That seems like an awful lot of ballsy (or is that suicidal) crews. Then again, sailors are crazy and racers are even crazier.

Kevin

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

Paul,

.... From the figures you provided 38 rolled, 5 of those sank, 19 were abandoned (which seems the sensible option, especially as they recovered their boats later) - so that leaves 14. That seems like an awful lot of ballsy (or is that suicidal) crews. Then again, sailors are crazy and racers are even crazier.
Kevin

Everyone is free to interpret the results of the mess afterward. Most people who have analyzed this race have to come to the opposite conclusion. Abandoning the boats before they were clearly going to sink ended in loss of life. Going from a 35 foot fiberglass boat in radical storm conditions into an 8 foot rubber raft is not necessarily a good move. Lives were lost recovering people from the liferafts. I think the generally consensus these days is you should always step-up to the life raft.

Paul L

[Lodesman]

Originally Posted by Lodesman

As I recall, a large number of the Fastnet fatalities were attributed to the crews abandoning their boats for liferafts.

Paul,

I said it first. I think most of the regulars know my opinion on liferafts - that is fight tooth and nail to save the boat and take to the raft only as an absolute last resort. I never would have suggested otherwise. I am referring instead to the coast guard, naval and commercial ships that came to the rescue during the disaster; I think the general consensus when in a broken boat and the storm is still raging should be step up into the coast guard cutter.

Kevin