Lagoon Cat smashed in Thailand

[smj]

Originally Posted by Cadence

So are the racing multi hulls if that is performance engineered. They tend to have catastrophic failures.

If they have catastrophic failures they were under engineered. If they don't have catastrophic failures they were over engineered. Hard to please the racing crowd :-)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Factor

Australian Standards are publicly available via the relevant government agency. (See National Standards for Commercial Vessels.)

Cool, Now I have Australian standards as well as US standards.

Thing is about the Australian Standards for Commercial Vessels. Seems the only thing they say about fiberglass is materials shall meet manufacturers standards. There really isn't anything in the standards about minimum strength, layup, structural design, impact resistance, etc., as it relates to fiberglass hulls. The standards do cover stability design and tests, but oddly not a whole lot about actual hull design.

There are some record keeping standards about keeping a record of the layup schedule and to make sure the workers have a copy of the laminate schedule. But that's all I could find about construction in the official standards for commercial vessels.

HUM...So the thing about meeting standards in the brochure, in reality does not really mean much at all, as there a very few actual construction standards for GRP hulls. None really in the AMSA.

Here's the link for everyone: https://www.amsa.gov.au/domestic/sta...nal-standards/

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by smj

If they have catastrophic failures they were under engineered. If they don't have catastrophic failures they were over engineered. Hard to please the racing crowd :-)

Boy, your a hard one to please. So where is that sweet spot of just perfect engineering. Really just because something does not fail does not mean its over engineered. It generally means it's been engineered well enough.

Yes one can over do it for sure, but then cruisers are generally conservative about safety and would rather have a boat somewhat overbuilt then say just a smidgin under built.

[smj]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Boy, your a hard one to please. So where is that sweet spot of just perfect engineering. Really just because something does not fail does not mean its over engineered. It generally means it's been engineered well enough.

Yes one can over do it for sure, but then cruisers are generally conservative about safety and would rather have a boat somewhat overbuilt then say just a smidgin under built.

He referred to racing boats which is what I replied to. Much different that a cruiser.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by smj

In a boat like your CSY the answer would be no. The CSY is way overbuilt and therefore heavy so maybe not as important as a lightweight engineered multi. Nothing against your CSY as I have a lot of respect for them.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Lightweight engineered its a small fraction in the market my friend, anyway a Catana dont have any secret for a FG profesional not even a FP, i mean come on , replace a core section in a Catana is simple straightforward for any profesional used to work with cores, what you say is lightweight engineered catamarans are repaired by who? the Factory?

Gunboat send a special trained composite carbón profesional to any world destination for repairs?? could be amazing!! or you are talking about to specific racing multihulls doing TW.. in that case i can agree,,,

[tuskie]

Seriously this thread has gone the way of the poor Lagoon featured in the opening post. It's drifted and been trashed. Clearly not designed properly.

This discussion of lay ups, laminate schedules and secrets that each manufacturer has is way off topic. Moderators please!

Lagoons catamarans are designed by Van Peteghem Lauriot Prevost. This company has more record breaking designs and more multihull credentials than any other. They have designed the various Hydroptere models, the 60' ORMAs that everyone in Australia is excited about, Bank Populaire V and even Kevin Costner's tri in Waterworld.

Do you really think VPLP don't know a thing about building strong boats that are fit for purpose?

Much has been written on this forum about the perception ofLagoon construction and design problems, especially bulkheads. We have endured detailed analysis by forum "experts" who clearly don't understand the mechanisms employed by VPLP to engineer strength into their designs. Fellas, all I can say is that Marc and Vincent have probably forgotten more about multihull design than you and I know.

[smj]

Originally Posted by neilpride

Lightweight engineered its a small fraction in the market my friend, anyway a Catana dont have any secret for a FG profesional not even a FP, i mean come on , replace a core section in a Catana is simple straightforward for any profesional used to work with cores, what you say is lightweight engineered catamarans are repaired by who? the Factory?

Gunboat send a special trained composite carbón profesional to any world destination for repairs?? could be amazing!! or you are talking about to specific racing multihulls doing TW.. in that case i can agree,,,

This thread was about a Lagoon that was trashed on a beach then it went on to a Lagoon that had its bottom torn out on a reef. Now you think a Catana or Gunboat with the same damage should be repaired by a common glass man? Get real, should they slap a bunch of chop strand and woven roving saturated with polyester resin and call it a day?

[minaret]

Originally Posted by tuskie

Seriously this thread has gone the way of the poor Lagoon featured in the opening post. It's drifted and been trashed. Clearly not designed properly.

This discussion of lay ups, laminate schedules and secrets that each manufacturer has is way off topic. Moderators please!

Lagoons catamarans are designed by Van Peteghem Lauriot Prevost. This company has more record breaking designs and more multihull credentials than any other. They have designed the various Hydroptere models, the 60' ORMAs that everyone in Australia is excited about, Bank Populaire V and even Kevin Costner's tri in Waterworld.

Do you really think VPLP don't know a thing about building strong boats that are fit for purpose?

Much has been written on this forum about the perception ofLagoon construction and design problems, especially bulkheads. We have endured detailed analysis by forum "experts" who clearly don't understand the mechanisms employed by VPLP to engineer strength into their designs. Fellas, all I can say is that Marc and Vincent have probably forgotten more about multihull design than you and I know.

Everyone knows that once a design is sold, the designer no longer has any control over how it is built. The builders commonly change all sorts of things, large and small. Especially designs with high production runs. Designers complain about it all the time.

[tuskie]

Originally Posted by minaret

Everyone knows that once a design is sold, the designer no longer has any control over how it is built.

Are you saying that Lagoon makes detrimental changes,without consultation to VPLP designs?

This would jeopardise all survey and CE certification as well as VPLP's considerable reputation. Yet, VPLP keep designing new Lagoon catamarans.

Or is this just more innuendo, uninformed speculation and rumour mungering?

[Donkey]

There seems to be enough wisdom here that perhaps you could do your own laminates schedules and supply it to your chosen manufacturer....seems they're untrustworthy anyway.

Perhaps add a few performance criteria.
1/ Must be able to withstand being mercilessly pounded on the beach.

That should suit the original thread.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by tuskie

Are you saying that Lagoon makes detrimental changes,without consultation to VPLP designs?

This would jeopardise all survey and CE certification as well as VPLP's considerable reputation. Yet, VPLP keep designing new Lagoon catamarans.

Or is this just more innuendo, uninformed speculation and rumour mungering?

No, what he say is VPLP design the boat but is not responsable in any form about how is build it , lets see if you get the point, early Lagoons have bulkheads problems due a poor workmanship at the yard and the sole decisión about it by Lagoon, VPLP is not Lagoon , its a designer firm doing designs for a multitude of builders, the builder follow the construction plans but scantlings and materials used are Lagoon decisions.
Yes as you say very clear VPLP design the catamarans and Lagoon build the boats.

[Goosebumps]

Originally Posted by smj

Seems to me there would only be a handful of people on this forum if that, who could understand the laminate schedule on a multihull. Let's face it, most performance multis are engineered. Not only do the weight and type of fiberglass matter in a multi as well as how many laminates but also what matters is the orientation of the threads. I would guess the only people who could understand the laminate schedule in a multi would be the designer and maybe a naval architect. Take a look at a plan to build a Shuttleworth and then tell me you understand the engineering that went in behind the laminate shedules to make that a strong well built boat. Point is, you may feel better knowing the laminate schedule, but fact is chances are you will understand little about it.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I made the point that we need to be very well informed, be able to compare hull lay up data, wuthout having to visit every factory!
Then even if we do t understand the data we have co club memebers, marine surveyirs all over the p,ace who do and can adbise us. The idea is that we buy informed. Now if a sales person like factor tells me I dont have top secret ckearance enough to get final data on hull lay up for seawind and outremer, and this proves to be the position of the builde, then thanks those majes are of my list.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[minaret]

Originally Posted by smj

Do you know how many different types of glass, their weights, and their strand orientation there are in a multi? Like I said, it would take some really exceptional men to know that and to decipher whether that would make a strong vessel.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That is a ridiculous statement. Fiber orientation only matters with uni, otherwise it's just +45/-45 or 0/90; ie biax or roving. Uni is generally only used in specific places like building chainplates, and will not even be part of the general laminate schedule. Do you guys really think they hand the laminators a book hundreds of pages long when they build the hull parts? An actual laminate schedule is, of necessity, short and concise. Neilpride's example was fair. I'd understand not wanting to share every single detail of construction, with the excuse that it's just too much information, but here you have actual buyers like Weavis being told to go suck an egg when they ask for a simple laminate schedule, on the excuse that it's over his head! Perhaps if everyone published this information the general public might gain a better understanding, especially if they can directly compare the scantlings of different makes and models. Talk about a self fulfilling prophecy! Truly, basic hull construction is not rocket science. To state that this information should not be disseminated because no potential client could possibly understand it is belittling, insulting, demeaning, and generally ridiculous. I, too, would happily "move on" from any sales agent who insists on treating me like an idiot. I mean, come on, Weavis is a doctor. If he can figure out how to work on something as complex as the human body, and travel about giving seminars on how to do so, don't you think it's pretty damned insulting to suggest he couldn't possibly understand boat construction?

[Donkey]

Yep, it is that simple. Bit of 0/90, maybe some bi or triaxial. Anyone should be able to understand the why's and what for's. After all it is not as though those engineering chaps spent years at university or had their work reviewed until suitably experienced. Or even used those computer thingy's to work out complex load calculations. I am sure it is all done on the back of an envelope.

I work as a builder. I hear all the time form concreters and carpenters who think they are smarter than the engineers. Some people just don't know what they don't know.

Given the know it all nature of forums and the grossly misinformed sprouting of opinions it is little wonder that a manufacturer would not post the sort of information that you are after. The most surprising thing is that people don't realise this.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by Donkey

Yep, it is that simple. Bit of 0/90, maybe some bi or triaxial. Anyone should be able to understand the why's and what for's. After all it is not as though those engineering chaps spent years at university or had their work reviewed until suitably experienced. Or even used those computer thingy's to work out complex load calculations. I am sure it is all done on the back of an envelope.

I work as a builder. I hear all the time form concreters and carpenters who think they are smarter than the engineers. Some people just don't know what they don't know.

Given the know it all nature of forums and the grossly misinformed sprouting of opinions it is little wonder that a manufacturer would not post the sort of information that you are after. The most surprising thing is that people don't realise this.

Really?

If the information is posted, then it matters not WHAT people say.

The reality is in print. People are then not misinformed.

The most surprising thing is that you dont realise this.