Performance 50-55' Cats: Outremer vs Catana vs Swiss Catamaran

[2Hulls]

Originally Posted by yeloya

Catana 582.... I personally don't like.... the lines which are running below the cockpit to the huge winch aft.

That's a curious preference. Most knowledgeable people that have sailed with us can't understand why more boat designers haven't copied that idea - along with the dual mainsheets. No lines on the deck or cabin roof and all lines stow neatly in the line bins in the aft crossbeam. Everything (except head sail changes) is handled in the cockpit. What did you find detrimental with that arrangement?

Dave

[beiland]

Originally Posted by SVNeko

Its an aside, but how do you think a nacelle affects pounding? O Yachts have a 55' cat with a sharp nacelle so big its almost another hull. Designed by Laurent Bourgnon. They say it parts the seas and reduces pounding. I am not sure but it is interesting. O-YACHTS - Class 5

I've had these thoughts on my mind for many years, so i went back to find some history of postings;
1) 2003..... Big Cat, alt CB's & sail rigs - Boat Design Forums

excerpt....One item of your thought processes caught my attention in particular; your desire for a single centerboard, and real shallow draft capabilities. I'll certainly second that motion, that shallow draft idea. One of the greatest attributes of multihulls is their capability to really go exploring ALL the water areas including those tributaries, lagoons, reefs, etc. That's why I had kick-up CB's in each hull of my design.

BUT, what you may not have noticed was my alternative to the CB's in each hull. Look at the attached drawing, (or the very bottom profile drwg that denotes "asymmetrical CB's, nacelle mounted". First, imagine a flat plate, on edge, mounted down the centerline on the underside of the bridge deck. This flat plate will act as a rib to strengthen the fore-to-aft rigidity of the vessel, a somewhat weaker characteristic in a catamaran structure vs. a keeled monohull. If a tow bundle (rope, etc) of carbon fiber (kevlar, PBO, etc) was laid along the bottom edge of this flat plate, the rigidity could be even greater (sort of akin to a bottom truss structure, or a flange of an 'I' beam). Now on either side of this flat plate I propose to mount a centerboard, not a single, symmetrical one, but rather two asymmetrical ones; sort of like a single board split in half. The flat sides of these asymmetric boards would fit up against the flat plate nacelle, and rotate on oversize (possibly 1-foot) diameter bearings. The flat fit & big bearings would together supply a great big surface for the large bending moments to bear against. Only one board at a time would be lowered. In fact the two could be linked together such that the act of lifting one automatically lowers (& powers) the other down. And they both could be rigged to 'kick up' upon hitting any solid object and/or for shallow cruising. The control lines (cables) could be routed right up to the cabin top and back to the cockpit.

There are several advantages to an asymmetrical shaped centerboard. First, it requires less total board area to develop a leeway reducing force....so the board size is reduced. Secondly, since it is asymmetrical, it does not require an angle of attack (does not require the boat itself to be sailed at a skewed angle) to develop the 'board's lift' (leeway reducing force). This actually may result in the vessel making less leeway. Plus the drag forces associated with the CB lift forces are on the centerline of the vessel, rather than off in one hull that produces turning moments about the center of the vessel.

This centerline mounting may also improve the tacking capabilities of the vessel as it allows the 'clean' hulls to slip a little while pivoting about the central board.

The front of this nacelle/plate could be configured to act as a wave splitter to actually attack, up front, the formation of those peaky waves under the tramp areas that eventually slap at our bridge deck underside. We kind of slice those waves down a bit. A lightweight fairing might also be added to this 'flat plate nacelle' so it appears outwardly much more aesthetically pleasing, as well as more curvature to shed those peaky waves.

2) 2004....subject came up again, Wave splitter on catamarans

3) 2007....Center nacelles and wave pounding in cats

4) 2004... Bridge Deck Slamming

...excerpt....I continue to be amazed by the lack of imagination on behalf of designers and builders when coping with this problem of interference between the bridge underdeck area of catamarans and the sea. This problem has been with us for quite some time now, but our feeble attempts to cope with it seem to be limited to raising the height of the underdeck as far as we can go without totally disrupting the overall height of, or looks of the vessel.

Lets look at just a few questions: a) Why would we want to put a big FLAT plate area in such close proximity to a very irregular sea surface? ....sort of self explanatory b) And if we bound this flat plate area on either side with a couple of hulls, wouldn't it be better if there was less convergence of flow between these two hulls? ...this is another reason that the fatter hulls of the condo-marans produce more interference c) And why wouldn't we consider breaking this big flat area up into smaller panels, particularly on ever-wider vessels that require ever-higher clearances? I for one would wish to eliminate as much of this wave slap and slamming as possible. It is a tremendous annoyance and very possibly a structural problem as well. So a little extra money thrown at this problem is well worth it in my opinion.

So where do we start. First don't present, or limit as much as possible, any FLAT surfaces exposed to the wave-peaks in this bridgedeck area. This is going to mean more diagonal surfaces and more curved surfaces being made a part of this anti-slamming underdeck shape. Two particular areas that need attention are those right-angle joints between the hull side and the bridgedeck, and the center portion of the bridgedeck where the two bow waves are converging.

The object is to have the water strike a glancing blow, rather than a direct slap. There is a whole variety of shapes that might be considered here. And we might term these efforts as reactive solutions....reacting to those waves and wavelets thrown at us.

There are also some proactive solutions. I refer to them as wave attackers or splitters. Their purpose is to reach out ahead (and below) to divide the water mass into something less formidable in power and/or direction. Another proactive example could be the analogy with those 'wave piercing' hulls of Gold Coast Yachts or the INCAT folks.

In the pleasure boat realm I believe Malcom Tennant has probably done some of the nicest experimenting so far. I particularly like his 'double arch' wing shape as configured on his NewYork 51 design <http://tennantdesign.co.nz/powercat/index.php?boat=91> This is the very similar shape I have in mind for the 'lite-weight fairing' I speak of adding to my 'flat plate nacelle' in a posting I had made to another forum. Some excerpts.... First, imagine a flat plate, on edge, mounted down the centerline on the underside of the bridge deck. This flat plate will act as a rib to strengthen the fore-to-aft rigidity of the vessel, a somewhat weaker characteristic in a catamaran structure vs. a keeled monohull. If a tow bundle (rope, etc) of carbon fiber (kevlar, PBO, etc) was laid along the bottom edge of this flat plate, the rigidity could be even greater (sort of akin to a bottom truss structure, or a flange of an 'I' beam). The front of this nacelle/plate could be configured to act as a wave splitter to actually attack, up front, the formation of those peaky waves under the tramp areas that eventually slap at our bridge deck underside. We kind of slice those waves down a bit. A lite-weight fairing might also be added to this 'flat plate nacelle' so it appears outwardly much more esthetically pleasing, as well as more curvature to shed those peaky waves. In profile this flat plate nacelle might appear as the one on my 65' cat drawing appearing at the forum picture site (Opps, I couldn't post this right now so you will have to look at the small profile drawing at the very bottom of the page on my website <Gamefishing Design - a 65' mast-aft sailing catamaran.> In other words my flat plate nacelle would form the center ridge of Tennant's double arch shaped nacelle.

Sorry to have been so lengthy with this reply, but you touched a nerve with me that the O-Yacht catamaran designer also recognizes.

[beiland]

Structure of the O-Yacht catamaran

[smj]

Beiland, my main problem is with the central centerboard. Having had twin and single outboards mounted below the bridgedeck on a catamaran I can imagine the amount of seagrass and general floating debris the central centerboard will catch. I have had to raise the outboards every two minutes to clear seagrass as it tends to catch on the lower units and drop our speed a couple of knots. I've also talked to an owner of a Kelsall designed cat that had the same problem with his centrally mounted rudder. This may not sound like much of a problem but it is extremely frustrating. If the central nacelle was low enough it may deflect the majority of the weeds from catching on the centerboard but would also tend to pound and decrease the potential of speed. Have you thought of a solution to this problem?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[UpOnStands]

Originally Posted by 2Hulls

That's a curious preference. Most knowledgeable people that have sailed with us can't understand why more boat designers haven't copied that idea - along with the dual mainsheets. No lines on the deck or cabin roof and all lines stow neatly in the line bins in the aft crossbeam. Everything (except head sail changes) is handled in the cockpit. What did you find detrimental with that arrangement?

Dave

This touches on another thread http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f48/look-at-the-coolness-i-came-across-156132.html
and blog Sail Mauritius - key post "Final Stretch"
big problem with main and jib halyards failing on an almost new boat.
Hiding the lines would seem to require a lot of hidden turning blocks making emergency repairs more likely and very difficult?

[smj]

Originally Posted by 2Hulls

Hi smj - I am 5'8" (173cm) and can see the opposite bow from the helm if I stand on my tip toes. The Admiral at 5' cannot see the opposite bow. Not surprisingly, I cannot see the deck on the opposite side right next to the cabin top - but this is also the case for single helm cats. If I needed to see the deck along side the cabin top on the opposite side all I'd have to do is walk over to the other helm - but there's nothing to see there of importance anyway. Of note is that the standing surface at the Catana helms is the same level as the deck going forward all the way to the bows, which is a big step up from the elevation of the cockpit - and the height of the cabin top is pretty low compared to many other cruising cats. On the Nautitech version of the dual outboard helms, the standing surface is at the same elevation of the cockpit, so your eye level would be much lower.

I'll add that we've experienced an "exposure" issue that is rarely discussed because if you haven't done bluewater night passages you wouldn't know of it. Flying fish. While at the windward helm at night I have been hit by flying fish. It scares the hell out of you and could probably poke an eye out if you were hit the wrong way in the face. So we never stay long at the windward helm at night. Beats me why flying fish fly higher at night. Everybody finds them on deck in the mornings, but you never see them flying that high in daylight.

Dave

Hi Dave, thanks for the info. My only experience with the Catanas is an older 39'er we were trying to purchase and a newer 50'er. The Catana 39 was basically set up as our catamaran is, twin tillers with a great view down the windward hull but not much over the cabin top towards the other bow. I'm 6'4" tall and on the Catana 50 I had no visibility toward the opposite bow. On our new boat we have carbon fiber tillers, and the helm station so far is sitting against the windward lifelines, great fun sailing but in congested waterways may be a lot to desire! Now if only I could afford a set of the carbon fiber helms seats found on the newer Outremers!



Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[2Hulls]

Originally Posted by UpOnStands

Hiding the lines would seem to require a lot of hidden turning blocks making emergency repairs more likely and very difficult?

Pick yer poison. The main halyard, topping lift, outhaul, and reefing lines all go below deck at the base of the mast and reappear under the main electric winch centered on the rear crossbeam. Each line goes around only two sheaves on the way. Yes repairs for a parted line in the run would be more difficult, but not necessarily more likely because the same lines on other boats likely have to go around sheaves as well, if not more of them (and they're always out in the sun and weather). If a line did part and I couldn't easily get to each side of the part to temporarily stitch them together to permit running a new line, the mast winch could be used for that line's function.

Dave

[rob denney]

Originally Posted by yeloya

I am too looking at this kind of boat for years, not easy particularly if the budget is limited..

Yeloya

Budget and performance (assuming similar materials) are both closely related to weight. Lower weight is less to buy and less to push through the water, leading to smaller rig, motor and gear.

By far the lightest boat for it's length is a harryproa. The Cruiser 60 weighs 4 tons, plus a payload of 3 tons. This is significantly less than the 50-55' cats. As it is longer, it is also more comfortable.

Not only the lightest, but the easiest and safest to sail.
There are no stays so the sails can be raised, lowered and reefed regardless of wind strength or direction.
You can carry full sail at night or in dubious conditions, knowing that if you release the sheet, the sails will weathercock and the boat will sit quietly until either the squall passes, you reef or trim on as much sail as you need.
The schooner rig has no headsails, so no need for any foredeck work, ever. The unstayed masts mean no maintenance or worry that some small part will fail unexpectedly. They also allow simple, fail safe halyard locks so halyards can be thinner and are most unlikely to break.

Harryproas are built using intelligent infusion. Everything is infused in simple flat panel moulds or on a table, then glued into male/female joins. There is virtually no post infusion laminating, filling or fairing, reducing the hours to less than an equivalent production boat. Infusion ensures the highest possible build quality.

The C60 has 2 double cabins with ensuites and two singles with a shared bathroom. There is comfortable outside seating for 20+ people and table space for 12 inside. The helm can be used from inside or outside and the view of the sails, the horizon and the boat from the helm is superior to any catamaran.

The first C60 is underway at Ballotta in Peru. Launch next year, then going cruising in Patagonia. More information at Cruiser 60 |.

[Polux]

Originally Posted by yeloya

I've sailed almost all of FP range cats Above 50 ft, I've sailed extensively Outremer 51 (rotating carbon mast, hydranet sails) , a bit Catana 582 (carbon mast, hydranet sails), Marquises 56 (just few hours and the boat was overloaded with standart dacron sails not in very good shape..), Aikane 56 (carbon mast, dacron sails), Gunboat 62 (for a day, carbon mast, laminated sails). I had a chance to tour in our marina the Swiscat 55, but couldn't sail her. She seemed to be very well made and light boat. The skipper said that she was very fast but I cannot tell you how fast since I couldn't sail her.


First of all, I have to say that all these big cats are behaving differently than any cat in the range of 40-46 ft boats that I've sailed. They are all relatively faster and more importantly much smoother and comfortable in rough seas.


In terms of speed, O 51 is faster in light winds and upwind. Above 15 kts of true, Catana 582 is probably the fastest in every direction. FP 56 Marquises was the one that surprised me the most; she sailed very well even at around 10 kts of true wind, pointed pretty well with the self tacking gib. Gun boat is obviously out of this league, she can point to 28-30 degrees apparent wind making 9-10 kts in 20 kts of true wind. Aikane wasn't as good as I'd expeted her to be, but didn't have enough sailing time to judge.

Which one is better depends on what you want to do with the boat. For coastal sailing, occasional passages, island hopping, etc, Outremer 51 could take the first place. She is a real fun to sail her, she is extremely sensible to trimming, perfect helm feeling and fast. We did 9-10 kts SOG, in close hauled at 35 degrees at 25 kts of true, with one reef on the main. At 50-60 degrees we saw 11-12 kts of speed. I don't think she is the right boat for someone who wants to circumnavigate with family and / or shorthanded. She is the narrowist boat that I've seen and cost app. 900.000 Euros, with a carbon stick, genset, A/C, satellite antenna, TV, etc..
Catana 582 is less lively in light winds. After 10 kts of true, she is fast and very comfortable. The volumes inside is OK but not as much as someone would expect from a 58 ft boat. I personally don't like the position of the helms and the lines which are running below the cockpit to the huge winch aft. Second hand of these boats are around 600-750.000 Euros.
There are very few Aikane 56 around and couldn't sail her long enough to get an idea. My first impression wasn't particularly positive though.
Marquises (and probably old Lagoon 57 that I didn't sail) could be the way to go if you want to sail in style with yr family. Reasonably fast, best available volumes among these cats and one of the best balance between volume and performance.

I've looked at O cats designed by Eric Lerouge. He makes fast and seaworthy boats with little buoyancy (load carrying capacity) If you want to carry yr diving gears, 150 m of chain, the spare of everything on board, you can forget it..

I am too looking at this kind of boat for years, not easy particularly if the budget is limited..

Good luck

Yeloya

Very impressive and informative. I know it is not on the range the OP wants and not properly indicated for that use due to a limited buoyancy, but have you tried the TS 42? the less expensive of the fast cats?

If so I would be very interested in hear your comments.

[beiland]

Originally Posted by smj

Beiland, my main problem is with the central centerboard. Having had twin and single outboards mounted below the bridgedeck on a catamaran I can imagine the amount of seagrass and general floating debris the central centerboard will catch. I have had to raise the outboards every two minutes to clear seagrass as it tends to catch on the lower units and drop our speed a couple of knots. I've also talked to an owner of a Kelsall designed cat that had the same problem with his centrally mounted rudder. This may not sound like much of a problem but it is extremely frustrating. If the central nacelle was low enough it may deflect the majority of the weeds from catching on the centerboard but would also tend to pound and decrease the potential of speed.

Have you thought of a solution to this problem?

Have not thought of such a solution, other than pivoting up the centerboard out of the water to clear the seagrass/debris.

I've not sailed in that much seagrass laden water, but the few times I did it collected on ANYthing below water,....rudders, daggerboards, even keels on a monohull. At least a CB can be pivoted up?

I had given some thought as to how far to let the 'plate structure' of the assembly project below the waterline (if at all?) for various reasons. I had not arrived at a firm decision on that.

[beiland]

Originally Posted by 2Hulls

Not 50-55, but I've owned a Catana 471 for 9 years. Since you specifically mentioned the dual outboard Catana helms, these are essentially the same on all Catanas having them, so I can give you first hand info. Ask away. For me and my 5 foot Admiral, the outboard helms are a terrific feature for visibility, rudder feedback, and a better sailing sensation. The "exposure" concern is overblown in our experience. If it's snotty at one helm, often it's quite comfortable on the other - assuming you want to hand steer. Not usually appreciated until you see the set up is the direct, solid mechanical linkage using Whitlock rack and pinion hardware. No cables, wires, slop, smoke or mirrors between your hands and the rudders. There's real feedback that likely isn't duplicated on any other wheel helm cats, with the possible exception of the tiller option on some Outreamers.

Dave

Thanks Dave, I was not aware of this steering set up and wanted to make a note of it by hi-lighting your posting for future reference

[SVNeko]

Originally Posted by beiland

I've had these thoughts on my mind for many years, so i went back to find some history of postings;
1) 2003..... Big Cat, alt CB's & sail rigs - Boat Design Forums. . . .


Sorry to have been so lengthy with this reply, but you touched a nerve with me that the O-Yacht catamaran designer also recognizes.

Thanks for digging these up. Clearly you have thought about these issues in the past, as have others along the lines of the O Yachts solution. The O Yachts design seems to have adequately addressed the structural issues of having this "third" hull, and even taken advantage of it by designing in a mast aft rig supported by the nacelle and a carbon bulkhead (moving the rig aft is another design departure catching on slowly). The wave "attacking" nacelle seems to exist and work in powercat design. I wonder how it will function on a sailboat. Part of the problem is getting a guinea pig to part with $1m to possibly end up owning a failed experiment. Would be nice to have some real world data on wave piercing nacelles on sailboats (as well as moving the rig slightly aft).

[Catbuyer]

Have you looked at alibi they sail surprisingly well even in light winds it is on my own short list .. I have looked at outeemere ,schooning, catana, oyacht

Sent from my HTC One using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[SVNeko]

The Alibi is an interesting boat. I have yet to hear how the underwing dinghy storage works in real life. Seems like a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. Also, I think they are all diesel/electric and that technology has not been proven out yet. But I like they way they push the envelope. Hard to get good info regarding reliabilty from the (I think) 4 existing owners.

[Imprezza72]

Doug has a good write up on his Outremer 55, reasons, comparisons to his old Catana ect. Not sure if he is on this forum but his web site has some real hands on knowledge.
Our Sailboat | Sail Wildling