Upwind performance of condomarans

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by PaulinOz

Quote arsenelupiga "it is rainy out there so have some time to burn"

Same up here in Lake Macquarie, so I just re read the last 10 pages to get a gist of where this all started and progressed, I came across these two gems that got lost "in the fog of war" (IE: informative, Cruisers Forum banter with slight thread drift along the way.)



Next but one post.



Then I remember reading this on Seawind's current website when looking for the load figures.

SEAWIND 1260 (12.45 METRES / 42ft)
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND EQUIPMENT -3 Cabin Version
"2 x mainsail single line reefing fitted."

I can only assume this is a misprint, based on the quick retort re: "mainsail that wouldn't have enough room for 3 reef points" from somebody that does know what they are talking about.

Absolutely misprint. As mentioned before one should never trust published numbers from boat manufacturers. Lagoon 400 jib sail area was always advertised as 28m2, but is in reality 35m2.

Noticing django post re boat behaviour when past hull speed, one can see that 30 % lighter boat will be 9 % faster with same amount of sail, everything else the same. As it is 30 % lighter will be somewhat less stable, hence there is cancelled benefit or worse of having light boat, above hull speed.

So that is why Lagoons are ocean boats where speed in open ocean is important and light ones are used by bay warriors.

[tuskie]

I believe that I may owe an apology for posting incorrect information regarding the CE capacity plate. I posted (#181) that the CE max load only included 50% fuel and water load, and therefore the remaining 50% fuel and water load should be included in the allowable payload.

My research and discussion has indicated that whilst this may have been the case previously, currently it is not. The CE builders plate as specified by ISO 14945,

( https://www.iso.org/standard/25641.html )

Indicates the following:

The following information, required under the Recreational Craft Directive (RCD) 94/25/EC (now 2013/53/EU ) shall be displayed on each builder's plate.

(a) Manufacturer's name.
(b) Boat design category/categories (if appropriate).
(c) Manufacturer’s recommended maximum load according to ISO 14946, excluding the mass of the contents of fixed fuel and water tanks when full, with the person symbol and the suitcase symbol (see example in A.2). For craft which are powered by outboard engine(s) the mass of the engine(s) shall be included, with the outboard engine symbol.
(d) Maximum number of persons that the craft is designed to carry while underway, according to ISO 14946, with the person symbol.

There is much conflicting or outdated information about this matter as well as confusion between max loading for stability testing verses max load for capacity labels. Both specified by the current version of ISO 14946.

I did not intentionally post incorrect information and genuinely believed that only 50% tankage was included in the max load as per the CE plate. I am not too proud to admit that I was mistaken in this regard, and will try “try to set the record straight” to the best of my ability even though I’m sure that there will be detractors.

So, according to ISO 14946 stability testing is conducted on vessels in operational condition ie. fitted with engines, sails (stowed in bags or furled), safety equipment, etc. Testing is done on both empty boats as well as those at maximum load. Though curiously, with “95% full tanks”. Maximum load for various Categories A, B, C, D is determined with regard to stability, freeboard, etc. Number of persons (75Kg each) is determined by weight as well as seating/accommodation.

It seems that the actual level of fitout for a particular vessel is the prerogative of the manufacturer. The ISO doesn’t prescribe, for example whether antifoul is to be included. This explanation is presumable up to the manufacturer. As Beancounter and ROM have explained, Lagoon and perhaps other manufacturers provides a list of “extras” and the weight of each.

In the case of the Seawind 1250, the Owners Manual does not explain this weight issue. In fact, it simply states a payload of 3300 kg, leading owners to believe that they could go to sea with this payload. I believe that this is misleading information. The CE builders plate (when fitted) shows that the actual Cat A payload is 1450 Kg. There is no information in the manual regarding what this includes or doesn’t include. ISO14945 determines that it includes full fuel and water, but presumably doesn’t include dinghy, outboard, spare anchor and chain/warp, covers, extra batteries, solar, wind gen, watermaker, tools, spares, drogue and warp, fenders, mooring lines, extra sails or that deceptively heavy antifoul paint. All inclusions that most long distance cruisers determine as necessities. Not sure how much that would weigh, but it doesn’t leave much allowance for people, provisions and personal belongings. If in your opinion that load carrying ability is enough for a long distance cruising catamaran, then all is good.

The CE certification system, together with responsible manufacturers aim to provide a system that prevents accidental overloading for fairly obvious reasons. I’m not going to enter in a debate with the uninformed about the legalities, chances of being caught or other risks connected with operating an overloaded vessel.

[arsenelupiga]

news to me

that is really good stuff Tuskie !

Does this mean that my Lagoon 400 that has printed cat A 3639kg means this is allowable load excluding full tanks of water fuel and holding tanks ?

[44'cruisingcat]

T

Originally Posted by PaulinOz

Quote arsenelupiga "it is rainy out there so have some time to burn"

Same up here in Lake Macquarie, so I just re read the last 10 pages to get a gist of where this all started and progressed, I came across these two gems that got lost "in the fog of war" (IE: informative, Cruisers Forum banter with slight thread drift along the way.)



Next but one post.



Then I remember reading this on Seawind's current website when looking for the load figures.

SEAWIND 1260 (12.45 METRES / 42ft)
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND EQUIPMENT -3 Cabin Version
"2 x mainsail single line reefing fitted."

I can only assume this is a misprint, based on the quick retort re: "mainsail that wouldn't have enough room for 3 reef points" from somebody that does know what they are talking about.

Sorry to disappoint you, but the 1250 has three reefing points as standard. First and second reef have single line reefing, third reef does not.

It's there in the manual, along with information about what equipment comes standard with the boat, ie epoxy barrier coat and antifoul, stainless steel dinghy davits, solar panels, etc.

I guess when you were looking back at where this all started, you'd have found someone who wanted to drastically overload his boat and then go racing, presumably to prove some kind of point? And someone else who "liked the way he thought", when he mentioned putting 8 tonnes onboard.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Barra

YAWN

you lagoon boys really need to just chill the he'll out and stop being so damn defensive of every imagined slight. It's all in your heads

44c I really don't know why you bother mate.

Funny thing is, at first I was actually DEFENDING boats like lagoons when people were saying that any boat without daggerboards simply would not sail to windward, or that the absence or presence of daggerboards was the sole determining factor.

Then all of a sudden you get the lagoon fanboys saying that daggerboard boats are no faster etc etc, then we have that only lagoons are blue water boats and of course heavier is always better etc etc..

Yet apart from Rom, who has been impressive with his honesty, not one of the owners of these incredible machines has chosen to post a track of his windward sailing. Weird or what?

[tuskie]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

Does this mean that my Lagoon 400 that has printed cat A 3639kg means this is allowable load excluding full tanks of water fuel and holding tanks ?

Not sure about holding tanks. They are full when max load stability testing is done but not specified as being full as part of load for builders plate load recommendation. Others probably know but don't wish to participate due to, well, you know..

You've room for another bottle or two of Moskovskaya Osobaya Vodka.

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by tuskie

You've room for another bottle or two of Moskovskaya Osobaya Vodka.

yeah, there is now more space, i was actually thinking of bit of native stuff like vine or kava etc - need to really study whats available in pacific. Suspect no vine except in french polinesia. Sampling thru pacific islands and then load the best stuff to last me all the way to AU.

[PaulinOz]

Quote 44C "Sorry to disappoint you, but the 1250 has three reefing points as standard. First and second reef have single line reefing, third reef does not."

I also need to apologize, I just realized the part of the manufacturers spec I read, copied and pasted in was not for a Seawind 1250, which we where discussing and seems to be discontinued now, but for a New Seawind 1260 which is advertised as only having 2 reef points in it's published specification. (see link below)

Seawind 1260 - 41' performance cruising catamaran

But after a picture search on the inter-web it clearly shows vessel number SW126001 with 3 reefs in the main.



So no disappointment on my part at all, in fact just as I stated in my post, an obvious typo on the manufacturers website in the spec sheet.

My reason for bringing this up at all, when I read back over the posts was trying to understand what you where getting at with what was an obvious dig at a boat, that's main sail only has 2 x reefs.

[Anders]

1260 spec does not say it has 2 reefs, it says it has 2 reefing lines. It still has 3 reefs.

[rom]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

Does this mean that my Lagoon 400 that has printed cat A 3639kg means this is allowable load excluding full tanks of water fuel and holding tanks ?

You should find that information in the user guide (ok short answer is "all tanks")

The information about CE plate was posted here at least 3 times already

I heard that Outremer stand by their boat specs and gets penalties for every kg above the spec (or above XXX kg above the spec). I would certainly like to see what their documentation looks like. I noticed in the specs though that their 51 & 5X both weight 1 ton more than they used to about 2 years ago ...

I've been reading a few user guides recently, I wish new buyers would put some pressure on manufacturers to obtain a better documentation set. It's a shame that we are left in the dark on such pricey toys !

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by rom

You should find that information in the user guide (ok short answer is "all tanks")

The information about CE plate was posted here at least 3 times already

I heard that Outremer stand by their boat specs and gets penalties for every kg above the spec (or above XXX kg above the spec). I would certainly like to see what their documentation looks like. I noticed in the specs though that their 51 & 5X both weight 1 ton more than they used to about 2 years ago ...

I've been reading a few user guides recently, I wish new buyers would put some pressure on manufacturers to obtain a better documentation set. It's a shame that we are left in the dark on such pricey toys !

here is what my manual says:

light displacement (have 2 x 300 L of water) 10,615kg
Cat A and B displacement with max load 15,394kg

So i would expect max load to be difference = 4,779kg

However my plate says 3639kg (luggage and 12 humans)

So I will take lower number - this is 10,615 + 3639 (luggage + humans) = 14,254kg, leaving 1 T on table if i make calculation error.

From my calcs I am currently 12,500kg, so have respectable 1750 kg for unexpected loads.

[smj]

It seems the conversation is partly about Seawind’s use as a blue water cruiser. I understand the load carrying capacity as being part of the blue water requirements, but does anyone recall any Seawind’s that have capsized while sailing?

[rom]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

here is what my manual says:

light displacement (have 2 x 300 L of water) 10,615kg
Cat A and B displacement with max load 15,394kg

So i would expect max load to be difference = 4,779kg

However my plate says 3639kg (luggage and 12 humans)

So I will take lower number - this is 10,615 + 3639 (luggage + humans) = 14,254kg, leaving 1 T on table if i make calculation error.

From my calcs I am currently 12,500kg, so have respectable 1750 kg for unexpected loads.

I believe you didn't get it right, it works this way:
"CE payload" (3639 kg) + water (300? 600?) + waist (4x80?) + fuel (400?) == 4779 kg

same for the seawind 1250:
1450 kg + ~1500 kg in tanks == 3300 kg.

or for the L440:
4055kg + 900 + 4x80 + 625 == 5900 kg

oh and some keep on mentioning antifouling not being taken into account like it was important ... please we are talking about 30 kg before drying for 2 epoxy primer & 2 AF layers. (I know I scrapped my hulls down to gelcoat 3 months ago, allegedly 63 sqm).
Whether or not the chain & anchor is taken into account is much more important.

[smj]

Did this Lagoon 400 actually capsize and sink?
http://www.wavetrain.net/news-a-view...oung-girl-dead

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by rom

I believe you didn't get it right, it works this way:
"CE payload" (3639 kg) + water (300? 600?) + waist (4x80?) + fuel (400?) == 4779 kg

same for the seawind 1250:
1450 kg + ~1500 kg in tanks == 3300 kg.

or for the L440:
4055kg + 900 + 4x80 + 625 == 5900 kg

oh and some keep on mentioning antifouling not being taken into account like it was important ... please we are talking about 30 kg before drying for 2 epoxy primer & 2 AF layers. (I know I scrapped my hulls down to gelcoat 3 months ago, allegedly 63 sqm).
Whether or not the chain & anchor is taken into account is much more important.

what is then light displacement 10,615 ? I thought this one includes water and fuel...