Is there a catamaran of cruising size that can self right unaided?

[Juho]

Originally Posted by rabbi

The problem is well known and a risk accepted by most cat cruisers. The probability is so low for all but the most ambitious high latitude sailors that it can be safely ignored.

I would not say "ignored". It makes more sense to me to study, and based on that study, then decide if additional safety measures are needed, and if your current plans are safe enough. This applies to individual boat owners, manufacturers, and researchers too (at different appropriate level for each).

The boat is a loss anyway. A boat that has been trashed around full of saltwater is worth next to nothing.

The thinking about this has been done some decades ago. with minimal results.

Maybe no loss of boat if you implement some new tricks that work. Thinking "decades ago" might be already outdated (or not, who knows).

[DotDun]

Originally Posted by Juho

There is no proof that one could not find something practical. I would not stop research.

Ah yes, the naval architects/engineers that have already studied the topic exhaustively and added capsize prevention to modern catamarans are nothing but fools!

Originally Posted by Juho

Yes, but unfortunately human beings do also stupid things.

And they get awarded appropriately by Darwin!!!

Originally Posted by Juho

Sometimes you can not do anything that would help, but that does not rule out the possibility that sometimes you could do something. I would not stop improving safety.

I think a good attitude is to continuously improve things in whatever fronts one can find progress, and not to select some areas that need not be improved.

Improvement performed properly by those that actually know will yield far better results than working from fantasized scenarios from the imaginations of those with zero knowledge and zero experience!

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

They are not unsupported but I suggest you resolve the Harryproa issue if you wish to be so demanding of others. If you do not wish to rise to the challenge here as your ducking and diving suggests then maybe you could honour Ron Denney's simple question with facts and figures to back up your assertion that harryproa's are not suitable for cruising on the harryproa thread. I notice though that you did remark on the harryproa references made earlier but now all a sudden when you asked to back your loose remark up you cry - inappropriate thread. Seems a bit too all of a sudden convenient to me with a helping of double standards.

Would you like a link to the thread? From the discussion, it sounded like you were already aware and following the thread.

Sure I commented on the proa when it was brought up in the context of this thread. I'm not the one saying this thread is only about capsize recovery. You are the one being inconsistent about it.

Let me know if you need the link and I will post it for you.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Juho

There is no proof that one could not find something practical. I would not stop research.
It's impossible to prove a negative. That doesn't mean I'm going to keep researching how to fuel a car on water just like I'm not going to worry about designing a self righting catamaran.


Yes, but unfortunately human beings do also stupid things. You can't protect an idiot from themselves. Idiots are just too creative.



Sometimes you can not do anything that would help, but that does not rule out the possibility that sometimes you could do something. I would not stop improving safety. Being involved in risk management as part of my professional life, you can't protect against all risks. You focus on those that provide the greatest return for your effort and when it's "reasonably" safe, you stop wasting time, effort and money trying to protect against soemthing you can't protect against.

I think a good attitude is to continuously improve things in whatever fronts one can find progress, and not to select some areas that need not be improved. In general I agree but the self righting idea has been beat around for decades and no one has come up with a vialble solution, so no one is finding progress.

.......

[2Hulls]

OK, Paul, help me out here: what exactly would be the safety benefit of creating a reliable self righting feature for cruising cats?

Any benefit must be more "safe" than:

1. a skilled and knowledgeable captain/crew who can minimize the potential for capsizes, which includes having real time weather information

2. a vessel otherwise properly equipped with safety gear, including escape hatches, EPIRB, etc., etc., etc. and suited for offshore passagemaking

3. insurance on the vessel covering total loss

This assumes the self righting vessel will be able to carry on after recovery and not need any assistance - which may be a huge stretch. Inasmuch as the self righting vessel may still be carrying all the safety gear of the permanently upside down vessel, where is the cost savings? Lower insurance premiums? Will these savings offset the cost of the self righting feature? - not to mention the "cost" of other compromises built into the vessel that enable the self righting feature to exist in the first place?

Dave

[DotDun]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

I guess fantasy to some is potential reality to others. It has always been that way. Why should the mods do anything? You are free to leave fantasy land any time you want. Why hang around? Seems a bit masochistic to me to stay in a place that can wind you up so much. I am also confused because when I go to a thread that holds no interest I simply exit. Strange how different people can be.

The mods are interested in furthering the knowledge of the cruising world to all who wish to read. Part of that duty is to classify the dialogs such that those trying to learn will not by swayed by falsehoods. Hence, my assertion that this thread is full of untruths, it should be transferred to an area that makes it obvious to all that the supporting facts are simple fantasy!

A small collection of falsehoods in this thread!

Originally Posted by paulanthony

… but the probability of a catamaran capsizing far outweighs that of a mono sinking.

Originally Posted by paulanthony

If you do your homework properly you will see that I am right. Get the values for all the mono's in the world v's cats. Then narrow down the cruising ranges to include places common to cats and mono's and then determine the number of losses via sinking compared to cats flipping. Then extrapolate the numbers of cats to that of mono's, determine like for like probability then come back and say sorry. ……

Originally Posted by paulanthony

Coz some times they sneak up on you from other directions and it only takes one and if you make a mistake you kinda up the creak without the paddle with no second chances even a small one. Hence the title of the thread.

Originally Posted by paulanthony

…..There are zero flaws in my logic and I am not going to agree with you just to make you feel better

Originally Posted by paulanthony

The conditions I posted earlier reference the 40 foot cat would thwart my interest in a trip because periodic 20 foot steep waves arriving at right angles while I am skiing down a 10 foot one(even with a drogue) would not appeal.

Originally Posted by paulanthony

If it can happen it generally will happen

Originally Posted by paulanthony

Many people who do not buy cats chose not to because of the capsize issue, be the problem great or small.

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

Would you like a link to the thread? From the discussion, it sounded like you were already aware and following the thread.

Sure I commented on the proa when it was brought up in the context of this thread. I'm not the one saying this thread is only about capsize recovery. You are the one being inconsistent about it.

Let me know if you need the link and I will post it for you.

Valhalla,

It is this simple, Really! On a forum you are going to get assertion, opinion, conjecture, thought, theory, belief, hypothesis etc, etc. It has usually been backed up enough for the person presenting to have conviction or at least confidence in their argument. The fact that you don't agree or don't believe is kind of irrelevant to the claimant. If you wish to dispute or have an alternative reasoning then present it with own your own rationale.

To expect to be provided with concrete evidence every time or maybe any time is simply not going to happen unless its is an extremely academic forum.

If you want hard facts and figures simply go and read last weeks weather logs but I would also suggest you start being intellectually honest and present your own evidence when making such claims as harryproa boats are not good for cruising if you wish the be the example of factual based assumption.

You might only have an intuition and I would be interested to hear it but you gotta chill down dude and stop being a hard arse with your demands for facts and figures all the time as your only retort in argument. You and I both know that what ever facts and figures I use to make a case would just be rejected out of hand immediately by you anyway.

Earlier on I did an insurance test and that was even rejected. You will believe and not believe that which you choose as does everyone and your opinion and argument if it does change will do so after time. My mission is not to convert you to my way of thinking because that would be a very very long winded task with no gain for little ol'me.

Incidentally my facts are these. If you have ten cats and turn them on their backs you have 10 dead cats. Extrapolate from that what ever you want.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

Valhalla,


My facts are these. If you have ten cats and turn them on their backs you have 10 dead cats. Extrapolate from that what ever you want.

And if you have 10 monos on the bottom, you have 10 dead monos. Extrapolate from that what ever you want. It has about as much meaning without information to back up the realtive odds of it happening on different boats.

I like to respond to these threads when they are clearly incorrect and misleading as some poor fool may read things stated as fact and believe it. I think there has been enough back and forth that anyone reading your comments and taking them as truth deserves what they get, so I'm checking out of this thread.

Good luck sailing the arctic in your capsize proof unsinkable monohull.

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

And if you have 10 monos on the bottom, you have 10 dead monos. Extrapolate from that what ever you want. It has about as much meaning without information to back up the realtive odds of it happening on different boats.

I like to respond to these threads when they are clearly incorrect and misleading as some poor fool may read things stated as fact and believe it. I think there has been enough back and forth that anyone reading your comments and taking them as truth deserves what they get, so I'm checking out of this thread.

Good luck sailing the arctic in your capsize proof unsinkable monohull.

yep.. you are right but I thought you were very interested to keep the thread on point.

One day you and I will have a game of table tennis and I have no doubt it will end up becoming the best out of infinity plus one.

[catsrule]

I still feel that cats are safer for so many reasons, less chance of getting thrown off, or getting your head taken off by the boom. Less chance of sinking, better visibility.
I would not want to be upside down in any boat, but I would feel that my chances would be greater in a catamaran.
After being in survival conditions myself in a cat, I would feel a lot less confident in a monohull these days. But depends on which cat and depends on which monohull. It still does not make sense to me that building something that floats, then filling the dam thing with rocks or lead for ballast. One hole the size of your fist can sink you if you can not get to it. There is plenty of flotsam and jetsam out there to hit in calm at night or in heavy weather.
I have heard of a couple of capsizes myself fairly recently, with loss of life, both were in heavy weather on a lee shore in shallow water tripping up in the surf. The same result would have occurred with a monohull. Unfortunately most of these things are down to user error, not the vessel.

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by catsrule

I still feel that cats are safer for so many reasons, less chance of getting thrown off, or getting your head taken off by the boom. Less chance of sinking, better visibility.
I would not want to be upside down in any boat, but I would feel that my chances would be greater in a catamaran.
After being in survival conditions myself in a cat, I would feel a lot less confident in a monohull these days. But depends on which cat and depends on which monohull. It still does not make sense to me that building something that floats, then filling the dam thing with rocks or lead for ballast. One hole the size of your fist can sink you if you can not get to it. There is plenty of flotsam and jetsam out there to hit in calm at night or in heavy weather.
I have heard of a couple of capsizes myself fairly recently, with loss of life, both were in heavy weather on a lee shore in shallow water tripping up in the surf. The same result would have occurred with a monohull. Unfortunately most of these things are down to user error, not the vessel.

That is very interesting about your survival mode. Can you tell us more? Would love to hear what happened.

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by 2Hulls

OK, Paul, help me out here: what exactly would be the safety benefit of creating a reliable self righting feature for cruising cats?

Any benefit must be more "safe" than:

1. a skilled and knowledgeable captain/crew who can minimize the potential for capsizes, which includes having real time weather information

2. a vessel otherwise properly equipped with safety gear, including escape hatches, EPIRB, etc., etc., etc. and suited for offshore passagemaking

3. insurance on the vessel covering total loss

This assumes the self righting vessel will be able to carry on after recovery and not need any assistance - which may be a huge stretch. Inasmuch as the self righting vessel may still be carrying all the safety gear of the permanently upside down vessel, where is the cost savings? Lower insurance premiums? Will these savings offset the cost of the self righting feature? - not to mention the "cost" of other compromises built into the vessel that enable the self righting feature to exist in the first place?

Dave

Sorry for late reply Dave..

There is so much squabbling(me included sometimes to be fair) that I miss the interesting posts.

I think that with respects to your points 1 and 2 a safety enhancement that offers during or post trauma some kind of salvation to an impending or resulting catastrophe would be a continuum of the hierarchical contributors to safety at sea.

It is clearly going to sit just prior to EPRIB stage but as you allude to depending on the variable nature of point 1 and 2 employed the incident of use can sit close or far away.

Whether or not these safety benefits result in the ability to continue a journey depends I would suggest on damage incursion. At this time a catamaran is not expected to recover from a flip so there is no investment made with respect to incorporating the ability to perform after a capsize except with regards to survival. If it did become possible for a cat to successfully right itself then the issue of fit for use post event would be reconsidered less it be up the creek without a paddle.

With respect to (3) I am not sure I appreciate fully your line of thought. We have been of late seeing cats abandoned that have not capsized and probably quite rightly so but I think they are still picking up a pay day from the insurers. If you incurred damage during a capsize and logged it I think the ticket would also be picked up by a reputable company.

P.S I would concur though that if you were upside down and were required to wait for calm weather to get back up the EPRIB would have effectively made the self righting tech somewhat academic and redundant and maybe just a more happy platform. So the self righting has to engage quite fast and possibly be tested as survival recourse before calling in the cavalry. To be air lifted away from a serviceable boat maybe be more of a Doh! than one inverted.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by Juho

In the case that the market would seem non-existing, a manufacturer would probably not invest too large amounts of money. If the manufacturer would believe that the problem can not be solved reliably, the answer would probably be the same. Different manufacturers could of course end up in different conclusions.



I'm sure many sailors will eventually hear about the possibility of their boat being knocked down, and they will quite typically be interested in studying the problem a bit deeper too.

To clarify my position a bit more, I note that since we are talking about potential loss of lives and loss of expensive boats, this matter is well worth some thinking. Wether there will be commercial products can be decided later (by others).

I have to agree with you and rabbi. Yes is an admiral idea. Doubt many builders would invest the money when a large part of the market would prefer goodies for the buck. It might have the connotation of an expected knock down?

[ZULU40]

Jzerro's linesplan showing her anti-capsize device. On a cat I guess it could be worked into the accommodation plan without much difficulty.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by ZULU40

Jzerro's linesplan showing her anti-capsize device. On a cat I guess it could be worked into the accommodation plan without much difficulty.

This is half a tri.. I'm pro. tri., no agenda I just like them for stability and it would be hard to knock one down. Pitch pole not so much but still harder than a cat.. And yes they have their drawbacks but not on the gist of this thread.