101 reasons why monos are better than multis...

[MidLandOne]

Yes, I haven't seen any need for frontal lobotomies among any of the fraternity down in this part of the world either .

[Boracay]

#282 Mono are more whale proof...

[MarkJ]

#283 Monos only chop dolphins in half......

[lolanreg@smartc]

Talbot, That pic of the plane is a P38 is it not? I saw these through the WW2and they always turned me on.A remarkable aeroplane! Have you any of them flying where you are or live? Would appreciate a few more pics. Natureboy.

[lolanreg@smartc]

midland one, I believe it read another man shall not "convert" another mans boat. Natureboy.

[lolanreg@smartc]

My dentist told me it would only a small prick! xxzzvvxx

[uncle_fred]

graet thread tea is cold breakfast burned just another day

[cat man do]

Originally Posted by Boracay

#282 Mono are more whale proof...

Really?

Would there have been any mono evidence left on display* after this whale action?

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ran-23009.html

let alone the getting run down by a 600ft ship action

* Yes, I realise there would have been a nice Mono display on the bottom of the ocean

[Amgine]

Heh... well, had it been a mono which isn't so darn stable, neither boat nor beast would have been so harmed! Consider the Vendee boat that struck a whale at full speed with no apparent harm to the boat (but severe gash to the whale.)

[Robertcateran]

The whale that bashed a hole in the catamaran came up from below. don't think a mono would necessarily be any better off

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by Robertcateran

The whale that bashed a hole in the catamaran came up from below. don't think a mono would necessarily be any better off

A mono has fewer targets

[Amgine]

Robertcateran: actually, if the whale is surfacing under the hull the mono will likely heel and slide off as its righting moment is likely not as great as the strength of the hull lamination. This is clearly not the case for the catamaran, whose greater stability over-powered its lamination. How many pounds would be required to heel so large a catamaran far enough to prevent damage is how much force the hull tried to absorb before it failed.

(In some respects this shows a benefit of catamarans, because it shows the monohull is less efficient due to absorbing more force without movement.)

[cat man do]

Yes, you must tell these people they got it all wrong

SSS

http://books.google.com/books?id=fkgu22wQ6NQC&dq=survive+the+savage+sea&pr intsec=frontcover&source=bn&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_res ult&resnum=4&ct=result#PPA17,M1

[Amgine]

Ah, I forgot... multihuller. NM Cat Man Do, reality isn't a point of dogma with me.

[Robertcateran]

Originally Posted by Amgine

Robertcateran: actually, if the whale is surfacing under the hull the mono will likely heel and slide off as its righting moment is likely not as great as the strength of the hull lamination. This is clearly not the case for the catamaran, whose greater stability over-powered its lamination. How many pounds would be required to heel so large a catamaran far enough to prevent damage is how much force the hull tried to absorb before it failed.

(In some respects this shows a benefit of catamarans, because it shows the monohull is less efficient due to absorbing more force without movement.)

But the lever arm from the impact is so much less that it balances out. The mono has more inertia with its thicker scantlings and ballast. I think that the smaller target is the only point that I give to a monohull