Trampoline Vs. Solid Foredeck

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by Ram

I dont think any of them are going to break apart- the worst that I see happening is a pitch pole and thats not going to be fun- I think it depends on who's sailing the boat and how strong the storm is-if a pitch pole would happen

Ram, I was concerned that my solid foredeck might be more prone to pitchpoling, but after that one experience I'm not so sure. The bows went down until the underside of the foredeck started to contact the water. The underside of my foredeck has a large flat surface which seemed to lift the bows as the wave started to push me from behind. The bows never actually went under but stopped about a foot short of that, which is about the bottom of the foredeck. Though the wave continued to lift the stern the bows just seemed to scoot along at that level and then began to rise. Not all solid deck cats have this kind of flat surface on the underside so this may only apply to the Endeavourcat 44.

[quartersplash]

We have a 47 foot cat and on our 1st trip from Florida to Ecuador had 15 to 20 seas for 3 days north of Cuba. The seas were from every direction and was just a total washing machine. The seas built up between the hulls and and were not only slamming the bridgedeck, but also pushing back forward through the tramps and tore them both almost completely out, and also broke the aluminum catwalk. It litterally ripped the cross beams out of the main structure and bent the rest. I would say that in my case, no way would I replace the tramp with solid!
Good Luck.

[djeeke]

Originally Posted by quartersplash

The seas were from every direction and was just a total washing machine. The seas built up between the hulls and and were not only slamming the bridgedeck, but also pushing back forward through the tramps and tore them both almost completely out, and also broke the aluminum catwalk. It litterally ripped the cross beams out of the main structure and bent the rest. I would say that in my case, no way would I replace the tramp with solid!

Did anything else but the 'loose' parts break? I guess not, otherwise you would have mentioned your boat came apart...
This does not confirm a solid foredeck would have been taken out as your tramp, catwalk and even cross beams have...
A boat with a solid foredeck for sure would have slammed a lot more !

But I understand the concerns ! Instead of totally breaking up a boat with solid foredeck (instance which luckily is unknown as of yet) , only the tramp and ancillaries have been taken out... This still keeps you afloat and safe !

[Ram]

Originally Posted by Captain Bill

Ram, I was concerned that my solid foredeck might be more prone to pitchpoling, but after that one experience I'm not so sure. The bows went down until the underside of the foredeck started to contact the water. The underside of my foredeck has a large flat surface which seemed to lift the bows as the wave started to push me from behind. The bows never actually went under but stopped about a foot short of that, which is about the bottom of the foredeck. Though the wave continued to lift the stern the bows just seemed to scoot along at that level and then began to rise. Not all solid deck cats have this kind of flat surface on the underside so this may only apply to the Endeavourcat 44.

Pitchpoling would only be a threat when the wave high was high/steep enough to allow your boat to surf at a high speed fast enough to bury the bow- if you could slow the boat down that would reduce this chance of this happening- when things get that bad Im not sailing anymore im breaking out a chute or pulling a drouge under a hankerchif

[Captain Bill]

Ram, I don't actually think I was in any danger of pitchpoling that day, the waves were steep because I was crossing some relatively shallow water approaching an inlet. If things were that bad I certainly would not have had the sails up. As it was I had 2 reefs in. I was only commenting because when I bought the boat I was a bit concerned that the weight forward would make her more prone to pitchpoling. Having been on other cats with tramps where the bows did go under in a steep sea, though we were not going fast enough or burying them deep enough to pitchpole, I was struck by the difference in the way the boat reacted compared to them when put into such a position. The bow definitely stopped going down when the bridgedeck hit the water and the speed was translated into lifting the bow as it planed on the underside of the foredeck. The boat also slowed substantially as all this was taking place. I'm not saying this boat won't pitchpole under any circumstances, I'm just no longer concerned that the boat is any more prone to it than any other design. In fact it might be slightly less prone to it, but I'm not going to push it to find out.

I do have to admit I have never had my boat out in conditions that Quartersplash has described, but a Voyage 47 is a very wide boat. Since it spans a larger area a much larger wave can get underneath it and come up through the tramp. Being a narrow cat I've found that once the seas get above 3 feet the whole boat tends to ride on the same wave. I really don't get a situation where I have the hulls in a trough and a crest in between. I also don't think that my foredeck is any less capable from a stress standpoint than any other part of my bridgedeck. If conditions are going to break my foredeck they'll probably break the rest of the boat as well. If things get really bad I would be worried about several other issues before I worried about the structural integrity of the foredeck.

[thinwater]

having sailed on both types.

• Not only can you lounge on the tramp, the wind comes from underneith. Very cool.
• My PDQ has built-in chairs at the aft edge of the tramp, so that difference is mute.
• Tramps can be a little more wet.
• Tramps are not slipery when wet, compared to FRP
• Tramps do not hurt if you need to kneel to work in rough weather... or nice weather.
• If you fall on a tramp, you tend to fall to the middle: if you fall on a hard deck you tend to fall out, since the deck is crowned.
• It is generally easier to lash things to a tramp... though for 15 years I have allways just thrown the boat hook on the tramp and have never lost one. It just stays in the center.
• Where one would stand on a solid deck in rough weather, you will often wish to kneel in rough weather on a tramp, which is very secure compared to a hard deck.
• Tramps do not last forever - 5-8 years.
• Tramps can be destroyed by green water... but that might not be worse than the alternative.
• Tramps can be cut by a carlessly placed anchor etc.... but FRP can be scratched and the anchor may slide away.
• It's easy to wash of line and chain on a tramp.

Some people find a tramp unsettling to walk on because of the slightly poorer footing, particularly when it is rough, but I gather I have dome it so long I preffer the slight shock absorption of a tramp and accept the slight loose in stability as a fair trade. Taste, I suppose.

[sandy daugherty]

There are a higher incidence of pitch-poles among solid fordeck cats. This is from accident data. That does not make pitchpoles mandatory.

Beach-cat owners know that you can submerge a bow to a limited extent and the boat will not pitch, but it will slow down. The weight of water is unloaded thru the tramps.

Does a solid foredeck give you more room inside? No. The Designer gave you more room inside because he was designing a roomier cat.

The reason there are more solid foredeck cats in your price range is that they are less desirable in today's market, hence have a lower price.

There is always a lot of room left for quibling over minutiae, and there will always be apocryphal personal experiences, but the market speaks loudest.

For a cruiser of moderate means, the best wisdom is still "go smaller, go sooner!"

[Ram]

I had a Prendle 18 for years and sailed it in some wicked weather burying the bows many times and I was thrown in the water when the boat stopped on a dime more than once! Fast & Fun!

[Captain Bill]

Sandy, I would be interesting in reading that accident data, can you tell me where to find it?

[sandy daugherty]

Its not published. Part of the data is from Lloyd's and is proprietary, and part from the Coast Guard and NTSB Data. It dates back to the GIGO era of computers [garbage in, garbage out] and used definitions that changed over time. In short, the data was horrible, and there were no narrative reports attached. I tried to relate the different generations and definitions and came to the conclusion that there would be no objective reliable results other than a few generalities, without pouring a lot of money on the problem, and then with little hope of useful information. The sample was to small, the reporting too erratic, and the reporters too unsophisticated. See:

SSCA Discussion Board • View topic - Trimaran capsizes off New Zealand! Multi-hull or Mono-hull?

[cyan]

FAST FOREWARD 10 YEARS...

This 10 year old thread is quite interesting, given new catamaran designs that incorporate solid foredecks such as the Bali 4.5. The point just came up in another thread about new catamaran displacement claims. Recent marketing/reviews are focused upon the minimal weight penalty of this solid foredeck because of newer materials...
https://catamaranguru.com/brokerage/...ali-catamarans
"netting is no longer a necessity for weight reduction up forward on some designs of cruising catamarans"

However, this dodges a big concern, IMO: pitchpoling. If your cat runs downwind in large rollers with a bit too much speed, and then digs in both bows at the bottom of the trough, would you feel safer with a trampoline or a solid foredeck? I've seen it done with a tramp. I'm not sure I want to see it happen with a big flat surface scooping a few tons of water.

The argument is that the Bali 4.5 solid deck (is high and) has extra bouyancy that tramps do not provide. The way I remember these situations, though, is that everything is MOVING: the boat, the water, the water UNDER the water. If you run with the wind and unfortunately surf straight down a large rolling wave with no drogue, fast enough to bury the bows at the bottom (not a great idea), you are stabbing the next wave at the WORST possible point. The surface water here is actually DECENDING on the back/windward side of next the roller just as your bows need to RISE back above the surface. Poking the bear. This instant seems to me like a bigger tripping danger for a solid foredeck than for a trampoline, no? Sure there is more bouyancy, but does that make up for the fact that you are trying to lift a flat panel upward against the force of a waterfall? I think I'd rather try to lift a net against such force.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by cyan

FAST FOREWARD 10 YEARS...

This 10 year old thread is quite interesting, given new catamaran designs that incorporate solid foredecks such as the Bali 4.5. The point just came up in another thread about new catamaran displacement claims. Recent marketing/reviews are focused upon the minimal weight penalty of this solid foredeck because of newer materials...
https://catamaranguru.com/brokerage/...ali-catamarans
"netting is no longer a necessity for weight reduction up forward on some designs of cruising catamarans"

However, this dodges a big concern, IMO: pitchpoling. If your cat runs downwind in large rollers with a bit too much speed, and then digs in both bows at the bottom of the trough, would you feel safer with a trampoline or a solid foredeck? I've seen it done with a tramp. I'm not sure I want to see it happen with a big flat surface scooping a few tons of water.

The argument is that the Bali 4.5 solid deck (is high and) has extra bouyancy that tramps do not provide. The way I remember these situations, though, is that everything is MOVING: the boat, the water, the water UNDER the water. If you run with the wind and unfortunately surf straight down a large rolling wave with no drogue, fast enough to bury the bows at the bottom (not a great idea), you are stabbing the next wave at the WORST possible point. The surface water here is actually DECENDING on the back/windward side of next the roller just as your bows need to RISE back above the surface. Poking the bear. This instant seems to me like a bigger tripping danger for a solid foredeck than for a trampoline, no? Sure there is more bouyancy, but does that make up for the fact that you are trying to lift a flat panel upward against the force of a waterfall? I think I'd rather try to lift a net against such force.

I'm not going to speak to that.


Having sailed on both, I think I find tramps more fun. It doesn't hurt if you fall. They are more comfortable for lounging and that really is important. It can be absolutely zen to hang you head over the front and watch the water go by. I believe you are less likely to wash off, because there is no crown and the water is pushing you down. We left a boat hooks up there, unrestrained, with green water many times, and never lost one, on two different cats. Yes, the footing is "different," but not alarming to a multihull sailor. With the quick motion of a cat in rough sees, I like it better.



I'm not saying a solid deck is bad. I'm just sayin' I don't see it as an obvious plus either. Just different.

[cyan]

Originally Posted by thinwater

I'm not going to speak to that.


Having sailed on both, I think I find tramps more fun. It doesn't hurt if you fall. They are more comfortable for lounging and that really is important. It can be absolutely zen to hang you head over the front and watch the water go by. I believe you are less likely to wash off, because there is no crown and the water is pushing you down. We left a boat hooks up there, unrestrained, with green water many times, and never lost one, on two different cats. Yes, the footing is "different," but not alarming to a multihull sailor. With the quick motion of a cat in rough sees, I like it better.



I'm not saying a solid deck is bad. I'm just sayin' I don't see it as an obvious plus either. Just different.

Interesting take, thinwater. I think you might be one of the very few remaining original posters in the older thread! It sounds like your preference is more about convenience and comfort, similar to your older remarks. Has your view changed on this in the last decade? I think I prefer trampolines for "fun" reasons, but I honestly don't have much solid foredeck experience.

[fxykty]

There’s another aspect to solid decks and that is lack of openness, though I guess this has more effect on boats with large trampolines and smaller bridge decks like ours. Lack of openness means water, and wind, can’t get through as easily (not at all if solid) from below or above.

Wave crashes over the windward hull and onto the solid foredeck - tons of extra weight. Waves hit the hulls and rebound up and back and into the solid foredeck - tons of upward pressure with nowhere to go. Crest a swell and catch the full strength of the wind under the solid foredeck - that’s a lot of force acting on your boat at a great lever arm from the centre of buoyancy.

If the boat is designed for that from the very beginning then OK I suppose, but I wouldn’t want to put it to a test in a gale or worse.

Though many of the more modern designs have ridiculously small trampolines already, so I guess the heavier designs are fine like that.

What’s wrong with trampolines anyway? Tightly strung they’re virtually solid underfoot and they provide an awesome lounging area, kind of like a hammock.

[Captain Bill]

Originally Posted by fxykty

There’s another aspect to solid decks and that is lack of openness, though I guess this has more effect on boats with large trampolines and smaller bridge decks like ours. Lack of openness means water, and wind, can’t get through as easily (not at all if solid) from below or above.

Wave crashes over the windward hull and onto the solid foredeck - tons of extra weight. Waves hit the hulls and rebound up and back and into the solid foredeck - tons of upward pressure with nowhere to go. Crest a swell and catch the full strength of the wind under the solid foredeck - that’s a lot of force acting on your boat at a great lever arm from the centre of buoyancy.

I'm another one of the original posters and still have my Endeavourcat. One item you seem to be missing is that up till now solid deck cats tend to have narrow beams and don't have all that much more surface area to be affected. I have been cruising full time for 7 years and have had her out in 12 foot seas and in many a thunder storms off shore and never once felt the bow lift due to wind or waves in a manner that I thought was at all threatening. I've never had a wave crash over the windward hull, though if it did I would be a lot more worried about my large side cabin windows than how fast the water shed off my foredeck.