Catamaran Capsize.

[wingssail]

OK Guys, let's settle down.

I am not slamming (pun not intended) multihulls so let's not get so defensive.

I am just trying to justify my fear of sailing a high performance cat across open water. I've listed a few cases, but I am sure there are more, where conditions which I think are rather mundane resulted in catamarans flipping. Maybe I am wrong, but that's how I feel and the examples I listed seem to validate that.

Bringing up Sydney Hobart or Queens' Birthday storm is just "what aboutism". I say "look what happened to these boats" and you say, "Yeah, but what about Queen's Birthday Storm?".

Especially since I am talking about how safe it is or not it to sail a performance cat. So, how well some pretty conservative multi's survived Queens' Birthday doesn't begin to address that, does it? Frankly, the majority of boats in both Queen's Birthday storm and Sydney Hobart, and for that matter Fastnet, survived.

Condo cats are probably pretty safe. Agreed, I guess. But what about high performance cats? Are they safe in the mundane condtions in which I'd expect pretty much any mono to survive? Seems from the examples I gave that they are not. Does it mean I think monos are safe in Queens' Birthday conditions? No, assuredly not. But we don't hit Queen's Birthday storms every day, do we?

That doesn't make me right or you wrong. It just means that it is one big reason for me to think I wouldn't feel safe cruising in a high performance cat. If you do, well, I wish you luck.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by fxykty

Everything well said.

Regarding the insurance costs, I specifically asked my broker in NZ, who issues the vast majority of coastal and blue water policies in NZ for local and foreign boats. There are very few hurricane losses in this area and each blue water policy is individually assessed for each client.

I also asked if our premium is in any way beaded on charter fleet losses. He said no, those are commercial policies and individual blue water policies are leisure and there is no cross collateral.

That's really interesting! Not arguing, but didn't the premiums for all US based boats go up pretty drastically after these losses ?

We don't carry hull insurance so don't have personal data to go on.

Jim

[Yihang]

Originally Posted by Mr B

You really are hung up on sewerage escaping from tanks,,
My Cat sat on the bottom being pounded by waves, for 7 days before being salvaged,
Neither diesel or sewerage escaped from my tanks,
Do Mono's have miraculous tanks that dont spew sewerage out,
Both Mono's and Multi's have the same design tanks,

Choosing a Mono or a Multi is purely personal choice.
I prefer Multi's.

Well a demasted mono pr a sunken cat are still sitting in the tank's designed orientation, a capsized multi isnt.

I Prefer multi's as well for most things. But nothing wrong with some constructive criticism. It's how we make things better and safer.

Everything can be improved upon.

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by wingssail

I've been wondering why the focus on this particular capsize when there was also recently capsize Régis Guillemot's TS5 Hallucine off Portugal. Reports from Régis indicate an impact which flipped the catamarn but in the photo there is no indication of hull damage. Why aren't we talking about that one?

personally i have been talking about this one because it is in my own back yard, so it is extremely interesting re local weather / wave action

it is also a thread about this particular disaster that has re-surfaced...not a general thread about cats flipping.

cheers,

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by Yihang

To be fair....


Choosing between a demasted mono and a capsized multi without some really well thought out disaster strategies like non skid underside, tether near the emergency exit hatch and empty sewage tanks, I would choose the mono.

why would anyone have anything in their holding tank when deep sea ?

the only time we use our holding tank is in port...where i think the danger of capsize is acceptable

(even if there was some supposed risk from the holding tank...)

cheers,

[Yihang]

Originally Posted by chrisr

why would anyone have anything in their holding tank when deep sea ?

the only time we use our holding tank is in port...where i think the danger of capsize is acceptable

(even if there was some supposed risk from the holding tank...)

cheers,

The catamaran in question was on a day sail from Newcastle. To the central coast apparently. Not implausible that they didn't do a pump out before leaving Newcastle.

All I'm saying is it's something to think about.

But let's just leave it here. I concede.

[arsenelupiga]

wingsail has valid points - high performance cats are dangerous. Would I swap my L 400 for that french one that flipped and continue liveaboard?

Yup, in a second.

What is acceptable risk is subjective and one can sail conservatively and safe performance cat. But then.... it is soo nice to see and feel these 12, 15 , 21 kn. You may resist for a while, and match speeds of your mono to feel really safe.

But then one day you decide that seas is clear of objects, take a chance and you will push to boat limits. Seeing 24 kn instead of 12kn. Life is beautiful.

And then you will repeat that every time...

And sometimes we have bad day and hit something with windward hull that runs over say whale hull pushed up metre or 2 and with lots of sails, noone but AP at the helm, you are over.

[Yihang]

Originally Posted by arsenelupiga

wingsail has valid points - high performance cats are dangerous. Would I swap my L 400 for that french one that flipped and continue liveaboard?

Yup, in a second.

What is acceptable risk is subjective and one can sail conservatively and safe performance cat. But then.... it is soo nice to see and feel these 12, 15 , 21 kn. You may resist for a while, and match speeds of your mono to feel really safe.

But then one day you decide that seas is clear of objects, take a chance and you will push to boat limits. Seeing 24 kn instead of 12kn. Life is beautiful.

And then you will repeat that every time...

And sometimes we have bad day and hit something with windward hull that runs over say whale hull pushed up metre or 2 and with lots of sails, noone but AP at the helm, you are over.

They were doing 20 knots with two reefs. Probably just need a table cloth to average 8 knots. Sounds good.

[Mr B]

Originally Posted by Yihang

Well a demasted mono pr a sunken cat are still sitting in the tank's designed orientation, a capsized multi isnt.

I Prefer multi's as well for most things. But nothing wrong with some constructive criticism. It's how we make things better and safer.

Everything can be improved upon.

I totally agree with you Mate,
An upside down diesel tank cant dislodge diesel, Its a sealed container,
Oil floats on water, It cant get out the bottom of the tank, Unless the tank is lifted above the water level, Then maybe a small amount may come out,

My sewerage tank is the same, It has a anti syphon hose on the bottom, With a lock to stop water coming back in, Its below sea level,
Its got a sealed cap on the deck,
It cant leak in any position,

As for an empty tank at sea, We have to be 2 Nmiles off shore before emptying it out,
Very few people would be rushing to empty a Crap tank at sea after leaving a Marina or Restricted area for dumping,

Many other things have priority before you think to empty a Crap tank, Hahahahha

I like these posts as it prepares you for some thing you might not have thought about,
Like the position of my Dinghy in the mess if my boat does go over,
I can stand on the bottom of my solar panels to flick my dinghy up the right way if I need to abandon my boat,
The davits are great thing to hold onto, Rather than a slippery hull,

[donradcliffe]

Yet another mutihull capsize thread, deteriorated into sewage. With the same cat owners explaining why it's not a problem for THEM. Performance cats, condo cats, tris, I could capsize them ALL. In my cat racing days I capsized at least 50 times, so I understand flying hulls, pitchpoling, being pushed over backwards, breaking waves, and all the other fun ways it happens.

In 10 years of competitive racing only needed outside assistance twice on a capsized cat, once with water in a hull and once with water in the mast. If a cruising cat goes over, I KNOW I will need outside assistance.

In 65 years of sailing monos, I have asked for assistance twice, neither in life threatening situations. Once for a broken rudder and once for a tow after a dismasting.

While I could have afforded a cat, I went RTW in a mono because it was way cheaper, just as fast, and had a lower pucker factor. The pucker factor is best described as what keeps you from sleeping on a stormy night when you are not on watch.

[smj]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

Yet another mutihull capsize thread, deteriorated into sewage. With the same cat owners explaining why it's not a problem for THEM. Performance cats, condo cats, tris, I could capsize them ALL. In my cat racing days I capsized at least 50 times, so I understand flying hulls, pitchpoling, being pushed over backwards, breaking waves, and all the other fun ways it happens.

In 10 years of competitive racing only needed outside assistance twice on a capsized cat, once with water in a hull and once with water in the mast. If a cruising cat goes over, I KNOW I will need outside assistance.

In 65 years of sailing monos, I have asked for assistance twice, neither in life threatening situations. Once for a broken rudder and once for a tow after a dismasting.

While I could have afforded a cat, I went RTW in a mono because it was way cheaper, just as fast, and had a lower pucker factor. The pucker factor is best described as what keeps you from sleeping on a stormy night when you are not on watch.

And the same single minded mono owners claiming cats aren’t seaworthy.

[smj]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Well, another way to look at that storm is that there were on the order of 40 monohulls that did NOT issue Maydays and all of which survived. But IIRC, two out of the three catamarans did issue Maydays. And then there was one monohull that was fast enough to outrun the really bad wx and reach Tonga unscathed. And if I again recall correctly, Quartermaster, the boat that disappeared, never called for help. The last time I spoke to them they were trying to help the Mary T with her water ingress issues. They were hove to (or possibly lying to a drogue... my memory fails) and feeling ok at that time. Not long after they disappeared from the radio and from this life.



But really, the issue here isn't performance in catastrophic and rare storms, but capsizes under common, much less arduous conditions with a sudden and mostly unexpected wind speed increments. My take on the admittedly subjective evidence is that catamarans, other than the very heavy condocats, are subject to this risk whilst monohulls, even relatively high performance ones like Wings, do not seem to be.



I don't see this factor to mean one should not cruise in a catamaran, not at all. But a skipper should be aware of the risk and have plans in place that will mitigate the risk... just as all skippers should know of and plan for ALL the risks encountered at sea, no matter the number of hulls.



Over all risks may well be accurately equated by the insurance costs as you say... I'm surely not competent to discuss this. I do have the feeling that nowadays insurance costs are driven by the major losses in hurricane/cyclone areas, where poorly prepared boat of all sorts have been lost in great numbers. These losses far, far outweigh losses to monos or cats in normal cruising situations.





I do hope that in time more info about the capsize under discussion becomes available. It would be good if we all could learn something from this tragic event.



Jim

The Queens Birthday storm is the only event that has been reported that gets anywhere close to comparing apples to apples, monos and multis sailing in the same bad weather. If there are other documented events I would love to read about them.

[Ozbullwinkle]

I have been in contact with the Coroners Office as I fully expected that a Coroners Inquest would take place to fully investigate this tragedy. But, I have now learnt that this did not take place after all.

Here is what they have advised me:-

Re: Death of Helen Cooper Case No: 2019/216607
Death of Robert Cooper Case No: 2019/216696

Thank you for your email.

I can advise that the above matters were finalised on 19/12/19. An inquest was not held.

Section 27 of the NSW Coroners Act 2009 sets out those circumstances in which an inquest is required to be held. If those matters outlined in the legislation are able to be determined without an inquest being held then the Coroner may dispense with the holding of an inquest which is what has occurred in this case. No recommendations were made by the Coroner.

A copy of the legislation is attached for your information.




So, unfortunately that looks like the end of the line on this matter.

No full report about the likely cause of the accident which claimed 3 lives, no recommendations for other mariners or catamaran manufacturers.

I find this very disappointing as I would feel that a lot of good information would have come out of such an enquiry.

[BigBeakie]

I could not agree with you more.

If this occurred in New Zealand, there would have been an accident analysis, IMHO. As per: https://www.maritimenz.govt.nz/comme...ts/default.asp


But then again, New Zealand is a seafaring nation, that cares about these sort of things....

[chrisr]

Originally Posted by Ozbullwinkle

I have been in contact with the Coroners Office as I fully expected that a Coroners Inquest would take place to fully investigate this tragedy. But, I have now learnt that this did not take place after all.

Here is what they have advised me:-

Re: Death of Helen Cooper Case No: 2019/216607
Death of Robert Cooper Case No: 2019/216696

Thank you for your email.

I can advise that the above matters were finalised on 19/12/19. An inquest was not held.

Section 27 of the NSW Coroners Act 2009 sets out those circumstances in which an inquest is required to be held. If those matters outlined in the legislation are able to be determined without an inquest being held then the Coroner may dispense with the holding of an inquest which is what has occurred in this case. No recommendations were made by the Coroner.

A copy of the legislation is attached for your information.

Attachment 227448


So, unfortunately that looks like the end of the line on this matter.

No full report about the likely cause of the accident which claimed 3 lives, no recommendations for other mariners or catamaran manufacturers.

I find this very disappointing as I would feel that a lot of good information would have come out of such an enquiry.

thanks so much...at least we know not to continue waiting

what a totally screwed up place we live in that something like this can happen without any investigation...

cheers,