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

[Glenn C]

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. - Or just answer the question as I asked and leave the biting for kids, lesser animals and insects.

I would like to see the data please.

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by Glenn C

I would like to see the data please.

Sure just go to any brokerage site add like for like and as you increase your range you will see insurance for cats is not available or more expensive as I have done here.

Screenshot by Lightshot

They use wind data and wave data for a given area within the risk assessment. If a catamaran was literally impossible to flip you would expects to see a difference in the insurance premium - true? So why do you expect to see it the same for a mono.

Going outside the normal cruising grounds has greater risk for cats and for the life of me I can not understand anyone who would think otherwise.

Seriously who is at greater risk in a sudden squall? I will post an excerpt from Chris White yet again....

"Most sailors agree that the mainsail, particularly the large roached, full battened mainsail combined with the aft-led-shroud, no-backstay-configuration that is used in most catamarans today, is by far the most troublesome sail to hoist, reef/unreef, furl and cover. In addition, mainsails create significant safety liabilities because they cannot be easily or quickly reefed or furled when sailing downwind. In violent squalls this feature has caused more than a few capsizes. The conventional catamaran mainsail can also be somewhat risky to gybe in a blow."

Wind speed is squared. The only way you can keep a cat from flipping in a sudden 50 knots is to design the rig way too small so it can be kept safe from the unexpected and within the righting moment limit. Outside the normal cruising grounds you can expect to see weird and aggressive squalls. We see this under rating in many "cruising" cats designs especially in the cats operated by charter companies.
.
If charter companies started using "normal" rigs their fleet insurance cost would go through the roof.

A safe catamaran is one that is either underpowered by design or so heavy it would need a tornado to blow it over. (Not really a sail boat)

If you really think the Polynesians were not losing boats you need to do some research yourself. They ran a triangle and hopped between weather systems island to island. Do you ever wonder why they never went out of that triangle?

Cats are great but this near evangelical movement that keeps saying they are are de-facto super safe is wearing thin. They are designed safe. In most part their potential is locked away and when it is allowed to come out we see accident and incident and this is what my question seeks to address.. What tech is out there that enables the unlocking of potential whilst staying safe.

p.s In that link above those companies declining insurance for cats do offer insurance for cats against normal latitudes.

[med]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

Outside the normal cruising grounds you can expect to see weird and aggressive squalls.

And inside normal cruising grounds as well. There are quite a few horror stories in the Med around the Spanish/French frontier and the Golf de Lion. Around Cap Bear and Cabo de Creus you can often experience very sudden changes in weather and nasty seas.

I read a blog of some one who had sailed around the world who said the worst conditions he had ever experienced were in the Golf de Lion.

[Rapanui]

There have been ideas for unaided self righting, probably the most sensible was a combination of a masthead float and then shrouds that could be wound in one side and extended the other to rotate the mast so that the hull would rotate past the point of no return and self right. Have not heard if it was ever implemented or tried.
Several boats with masthead floats capsized and then flipped back through wave action. Note that these were narrow beam cats.
We have had cats for 35 years sailing the English Channel, from a 19ft cat (basically cruising version of Prout Shearwater dinghy) in which we crossed the Channel right through a 24ft one design, a 30ft Iroquois, a 32 ft Fountaine Pajot Maldives and now a 38 ft Fountaine Pajot Athena. The first 3 could have been capsized, but didn't, the worse being lifting a hull in the 19ft. The two Fountaine Pajots, while I am sure they can be capsized (and the Maldives definitely has been) would require severe abuse to do so. We never ever felt in risk even though the Maldives is a flyer with 200 sq ft per ton and will outsail nearly all production monos up to 40ft.
If you separate the types, the early cats had narrow overall beam and often knife like bows and were relatively easily capsized either sideways through wind and sea, or pitchpoling running downwind and burying the bow. I have a book from the AYRS which analysed these events in some detail.
The later, more modern production cats from about 1990 onwards, have far greater overall beam, higher freeboard and more reserve buoyancy at the bows. Recently, since about 2008, freeboard on many has increased markedly to gain interior volume. Plus, the entry size for cats has increased markedly in recent years, so 38ft is now often the smallest boat, and tendency to capsize decreases markedly with size. Except in the most extreme high latitude conditions, capsize of production cats is extremely low probability.
That there is a small probability of capsize is undeniable, but it has to be weighed against other risks such as fire, stranding, piracy/robbery, sinking, losing rudder, losing keel and so on. For our first 15 or so years, the question often asked by mono sailors was about capsize. Now, the question does not arise. I think this is because the evidence is all around them, there are thousands of production cats scattered all over the globe and they nearly all got there on their bottoms. Just look at brokers listings to see where the second hand boats are located. Look at the Leapards, which nearly all have to do a major ocean crossing for delivery. Not my cup of tea, with many features I think are undesirable, but they get there ok.

[mstrebe]

This is the 2013 recreational boating statistics report from USCG:

http://www.uscgboating.org/assets/1/...atingStats.pdf

They do one every year, it includes all accidents the USCG Responds to and all state agency reported statistics. For 2013, there were a total of 9 sailboat capsizes of any type which resulted in injury or death. This includes sail dinghies. A total of 8 fatalities were reported for the year.

Capsizes for sailboats were 97% <26 feet, and 3% > 26 feet in length.

I browsed through previous years and noted that the statistics are very similar year to year.

140,000 thousand sailboats have been sold in the years 2000-2013: http://www.statista.com/statistics/2...old-in-the-us/

I'll hazard a guess, based on the slope of the sailboat sales trend, that sales were better than that in prior decades, but if we just take the average of 15,000 sailboats per year sold back two decades and presume that no sailboats existed before that, then there are about 450,000 sailboats in the US. So. From 1980 to 2013, we have about 450,000 sailboats, of which about 330 have capsized. That's a capsize rate of 0.007%. Multiplying that by the 3% rate for sailboats >26 feet, and you've got 22 out of a million.

It's a completely inconsequential problem irrespective of type of sailboat. We just hear about all of them globally on this forum, and people get their perspectives warped by anecdotes instead of by actual risk.

The reason nobody can find hard statistics on monohull capsizes vs. catamaran capsizes is that it occurs so rarely that useful statistics cannot exist. You have to have about 100 incidents of comparable types in order for statistics to start having more "signal" than "noise"--and there just aren't enough capsize incidents for that to happen. That's why all these irrational arguments are exactly that: noise.

Also, 88% of all boat accidents were operator error, 11% all other causes. If you know what you're doing, and you're involved in a cruising sailboat capsize, you're literally 3 in a million.

Buy the boat you want, learn it inside and out, never beat to weather, and don't worry about capsize. It's never going to happen to you.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[rabbi]

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. - Or just answer the question as I asked and leave the biting for kids, lesser animals and insects.

I would like to see that data please (just like a couple of folks before me).

So far you have only posted some prosa from Chris White and a screenshot about insurers not wanting to take some unspecified risk.


IF you have really done that sort of "homework" yourself please share the exact figures about capsized cat vs sunken monos.
If you don't I consider your arguments to be just hot air.


If you had taken the time to get that deep into the problem you were well aware that there is no such device on the market suiteable for a serious cruising cat.
So why do you ask? Just buy a mono and be happy with your choice.


It seems you are here for the fun and maybe trying to trash all cats in general on the flipping-argument.
For the later you are a few decades too late

[leftbrainstuff]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

I do not know a great deal about catamarans except that they make me a little nervous.

I have read the pro catamaran argument that says a cat will not sink if capsized which is all well and good but the probability of a catamaran capsizing far outweighs that of a mono sinking.

I wondered if there is any technology that has dealt with and solved the problem of righting a catamaran hull unaided by external assistance while at sea.

No. It's simple physics.

I'd be wary of the unsinkable catamaran claims. The recent gunboat rainmaker loss has demonstrated clearly the difference between marketing weasel words and untested hypotheses.

I suspect your real concerns relate more broadly to survivability and self recovery. I've posted engineering responses on these topics in numerous posts.

There are some good texts on the topic of heavy weather sailing. Shout out if you're interested and I'll post the titles. They are based on analysis of empirical data that is correlated with engineering analysis. I'd recommend you read them so that you can understand the issues and risks.

Many of the government reports of vessel losses also are worth reading.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[rabbi]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

...
Screenshot by Lightshot
...
p.s In that link above those companies declining insurance for cats do offer insurance for cats against normal latitudes.

Insurers like only those risks they can calculate. Few people travel higher latitudes, so little base for calculation.
The majority of sailboats are monohuls, so the statistical data for risk calculation of cats in high latitudes is non-existent.

BTW: Production cats are very hard to heat efficiently due to their huge surface area. Who want's to sail in shitty cold weather and not be able to get warm?

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by mstrebe

...
The reason nobody can find hard statistics on monohull capsizes vs. catamaran capsizes is that it occurs so rarely that useful statistics cannot exist....

Excellent reasoning based on facts. This should put 99.9% of all discussions to rest. But at least it confirms my not so well informed impression. Thank you.

[valhalla360]

I'm still waiting on the supposed data. A screenshot with unknown data being entered and no comparable monohull data, means nothing. I'm sure, I could generate a similar screenshot for monohulls by manipulating the data.


Arctic adventures are tough to get insurance for any boat and online insurance forms are unlikely to give a valid result (they may spit out an answer but as soon as you go to purchase, they will tell you to talk to an agent).


Bottom line, your original premise is completely unsupported by any data to back it up.

[Rapanui]

Someone asked about the efficacy of the masthead float. The Sailcraft Iroquois we owned had one. There were several recorded instances of capsizes where the boat stayed on its side and were then righted subsequently with the use of launches etc. You would need to do the calc to see how much the windage of the float contributed to the capsize. These boats were narrow beam of 14 ft on 30ft OAL.
One main reason for Iroquois capsizes was the very large masthead genoa which could be 200% of the main. Try releasing that in a gust in a hurry and the chances and consequences of a riding turn becomes major issue. So while I have a lot of respect for Chris White and there is some truth in the fact that large roached fully battened mains being harder to handle, the alternative of having a larger fore triangle(s) can be equally dangerous in my view. Extracting Chris' comment re roached mains in isolation does not analyse the contribution of the whole sailplan to capsize.

[smj]

Originally Posted by leftbrainstuff

No. It's simple physics.

I'd be wary of the unsinkable catamaran claims. The recent gunboat rainmaker loss has demonstrated clearly the difference between marketing weasel words and untested hypotheses.

I suspect your real concerns relate more broadly to survivability and self recovery. I've posted engineering responses on these topics in numerous posts.

There are some good texts on the topic of heavy weather sailing. Shout out if you're interested and I'll post the titles. They are based on analysis of empirical data that is correlated with engineering analysis. I'd recommend you read them so that you can understand the issues and risks.

Many of the government reports of vessel losses also are worth reading.

Sent from my SM-N900T using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Here's a story of a catamaran that just wouldn't sink.
http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ne-143771.html

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by mstrebe

This is the 2013 recreational boating statistics report from USCG:

http://www.uscgboating.org/assets/1/...atingStats.pdf


Also, 88% of all boat accidents were operator error


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

Could well be.. and the consequence of a sail handling error on a catamaran has greater danger associated with it than a mono?

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

Sure just go to any brokerage site add like for like and as you increase your range you will see insurance for cats is not available or more expensive as I have done here.

Screenshot by Lightshot

They use wind data and wave data for a given area within the risk assessment. If a catamaran was literally impossible to flip you would expects to see a difference in the insurance premium - true? So why do you expect to see it the same for a mono.

Going outside the normal cruising grounds has greater risk for cats and for the life of me I can not understand anyone who would think otherwise.

Seriously who is at greater risk in a sudden squall? I will post an excerpt from Chris White yet again....

"Most sailors agree that the mainsail, particularly the large roached, full battened mainsail combined with the aft-led-shroud, no-backstay-configuration that is used in most catamarans today, is by far the most troublesome sail to hoist, reef/unreef, furl and cover. In addition, mainsails create significant safety liabilities because they cannot be easily or quickly reefed or furled when sailing downwind. In violent squalls this feature has caused more than a few capsizes. The conventional catamaran mainsail can also be somewhat risky to gybe in a blow."

Wind speed is squared. The only way you can keep a cat from flipping in a sudden 50 knots is to design the rig way too small so it can be kept safe from the unexpected and within the righting moment limit. Outside the normal cruising grounds you can expect to see weird and aggressive squalls. We see this under rating in many "cruising" cats designs especially in the cats operated by charter companies.
.
If charter companies started using "normal" rigs their fleet insurance cost would go through the roof.

A safe catamaran is one that is either underpowered by design or so heavy it would need a tornado to blow it over. (Not really a sail boat)

If you really think the Polynesians were not losing boats you need to do some research yourself. They ran a triangle and hopped between weather systems island to island. Do you ever wonder why they never went out of that triangle?

Cats are great but this near evangelical movement that keeps saying they are are de-facto super safe is wearing thin. They are designed safe. In most part their potential is locked away and when it is allowed to come out we see accident and incident and this is what my question seeks to address.. What tech is out there that enables the unlocking of potential whilst staying safe.

p.s In that link above those companies declining insurance for cats do offer insurance for cats against normal latitudes.

Loada Bollox... what you fail to take into account is that the insurer is evaluating your capabilities as much if not more than the boat your insuring..
The less 'Proven Experience' the higher your premium..
Its not the boat.. its the driver..

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by Rapanui

There have been ideas for unaided self righting, probably the most sensible was a combination of a masthead float and then shrouds that could be wound in one side and extended the other to rotate the mast so that the hull would rotate past the point of no return and self right. Have not heard if it was ever implemented or tried.
Several boats with masthead floats capsized and then flipped back through wave action. Note that these were narrow beam cats.
We have had cats for 35 years sailing the English Channel, from a 19ft cat (basically cruising version of Prout Shearwater dinghy) in which we crossed the Channel right through a 24ft one design, a 30ft Iroquois, a 32 ft Fountaine Pajot Maldives and now a 38 ft Fountaine Pajot Athena. The first 3 could have been capsized, but didn't, the worse being lifting a hull in the 19ft. The two Fountaine Pajots, while I am sure they can be capsized (and the Maldives definitely has been) would require severe abuse to do so. We never ever felt in risk even though the Maldives is a flyer with 200 sq ft per ton and will outsail nearly all production monos up to 40ft.
If you separate the types, the early cats had narrow overall beam and often knife like bows and were relatively easily capsized either sideways through wind and sea, or pitchpoling running downwind and burying the bow. I have a book from the AYRS which analysed these events in some detail.
The later, more modern production cats from about 1990 onwards, have far greater overall beam, higher freeboard and more reserve buoyancy at the bows. Recently, since about 2008, freeboard on many has increased markedly to gain interior volume. Plus, the entry size for cats has increased markedly in recent years, so 38ft is now often the smallest boat, and tendency to capsize decreases markedly with size. Except in the most extreme high latitude conditions, capsize of production cats is extremely low probability.
That there is a small probability of capsize is undeniable, but it has to be weighed against other risks such as fire, stranding, piracy/robbery, sinking, losing rudder, losing keel and so on. For our first 15 or so years, the question often asked by mono sailors was about capsize. Now, the question does not arise. I think this is because the evidence is all around them, there are thousands of production cats scattered all over the globe and they nearly all got there on their bottoms. Just look at brokers listings to see where the second hand boats are located. Look at the Leapards, which nearly all have to do a major ocean crossing for delivery. Not my cup of tea, with many features I think are undesirable, but they get there ok.

Your point is well taken. I am inclined to agree. I have managed to set the cat amongst the pigeons here simply because my original question mentioned probability to capsize and I should have expanded the context to infer higher/lower lats and off season sailing.

I also like the Fountaine Pajots as they seem to lend themselves not to far left of center giving safety and reasonable speed.

I am of the mindset that catamaran design should not flag speed as the ultimate holy grail which I think in reality it does not as the idea of flying a hull in a cruising cat would scare the hell out of me and I would want that little trick firmly locked away.

I notice that the industry at least in the high performance end is starting to introduce pressure and giro sensors to try and give get out of jail free cards in consideration of human reaction times or lack of them.

I wondered if there was some kind of inertia drogue bag that could be attached simply to the hulls that could fill when a hull mid section comes out of the water.