Coast Guard advice for all Cat Sailors

[Svsumurun]

I didn't click on this thread, because I was thinking it was just another bash the cats thing, but now I have , and like luff shack am also dock neighbors ( well same home port) as this cat. That microburst or whatever you want to call it that day was bad, and is more a statement of Lake Erie than anything about cats!
It can go from flat to dangerous in a couple minutes, and all it would take is to not make the 'right' decision immediately to be in a really bad situation.
The water isn't deep, and it reacts like a bathtub that you swirl the water around in.
There has been a really high number of drownings this year around here, so I kind of get the Pfd warnings- although I get that sometimes it's not the best thing ( which kind of sounds like it in this case, if people were inside ).

[smj]

Good, I think we’ve come to the conclusion once again that catamarans can flip and monohulls can be knocked down by the wind and sink, and statistically it’s about even odds. I believe we will see more of these threads in the future as it will become more of a common occurrence with global warming..........but that is an entirely different subject.[emoji15]

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Well, YOU appeared to say that in your post 92 above.

And that is what I was responding to. If that isn't what you meant, then let's quit the silly argument. Any rational person knows that any boat can sink in the right set of circumstances. Any boat can be capsized in the right set of circumstances. The odds of any well sailed and maintained vessel, regardless of hull numbers,experiencing either event are very much in favor of survival.

And yes, whenever these subjects arise, the "usual suspects" make the usual comments, and the other set of "usual suspects" feel required to respond in kind... and this perpetual waste of bandwidth ensues.

I wish I was of strong enough character to just not join in!

Jim

1: I quoted someone else's post, so never actually said that at all.

2: even the post I quoted didn't say rolled OVER. It said "rolled and sunk." If hatches are open, rolling less than 90 degrees might result in sinking. And that could apply to a great number of monohulls. Are they all unseaworthy?

Even if you can't stay out of these threads, you might try sticking to facts....

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Svsumurun

I didn't click on this thread, because I was thinking it was just another bash the cats thing......

You were correct in your thinking. The OP is the epitomy of cat bashing.

[Jim Cate]

Even if you can't stay out of these threads, you might try sticking to facts...

OK, I will if you will.

And BTW, to me "rolling" in this discussion means inverting, not 90 degrees or less which is usually called a knockdown. And rolling is quite often fatal to monos, even with closed hatches. It's good that it is so rare an event, and always caused by a combination of wind and sea, not just wind.

And because most ballasted monos will immediately pop back up from a <90 degree knockdown, little downflooding will result, certainly not enough to sink the boat...even with some hatches open.

Another thing... if it is ok to say the fact that some monohull boats with their hatches open could conceivably fill and sink in a knockdown and are thus unseaworthy ain't it kinda equivalent to saying that some multihull boats with too much sail up could conceivably be capsized by a big gust and thus are unseaworthy ?

I don't believe either of these statements, btw, I'm just examining the logic of some of the arguments presented above.

Jim

[Catalacmarc]

Here are my thoughts, first you should know that I came up racing Nordic Folkboats in San Francisco Bay, non-water tight cockpits and no reef points. I now own a PDQ 36, the outboard version so this is a cautionary tale(Reef!). I am very grateful that I have never sailed in an area where microbursts were an issue. All that said, I have also been party to a capsize and turtle of a small keelboat, a keel Rhodes 19. There are a lot of ways to go on an a boat. A knockdown with an open hatch or porthole not the least. But regards the life jacket, here is something that has stuck with me for the last 45 or so years. Back then, I knew a guy, a 505 sailor and Rugby Player, crewing on keelboats on the Bay. He was last seen on the leeward side of a boat and was gone. No lifejacket and his body was never recovered.

and another one, after the other crewkid and myself righted the Rhodes 19, I turned around and saw the skipper hanging on to the rudder and drifting towards the Golden Gate with the Ebb Tide as the West wind pushed the boat East. There was not a thing I could do, no lines that weren't in a knot, nothing. He was picked up by a charter fishing boat some time later. So today, I wear a PFD. I am also glad that like many a Catamaran, a Rhodes 19 has adequate flotation.
Regarding Catamarans, the more efficient they go to windward, the more vulnerable they are to wind capsizes. Many cats point plenty high but make leeway as they slip sideways. My previous cat, a 9 Meter Catalac, was essentially wind capsize proof but made ungodly loads of leeway, V hulls, no centerboard nor keels. But a 90+ knot microburst might just do it. It would slip sideways when over powered. The only capsizes Catalac I know of involved waves. I gather the same is true of some of the Patterson designs.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

OK, I will if you will.

And BTW, to me "rolling" in this discussion means inverting, not 90 degrees or less which is usually called a knockdown. And rolling is quite often fatal to monos, even with closed hatches. It's good that it is so rare an event, and always caused by a combination of wind and sea, not just wind.

And because most ballasted monos will immediately pop back up from a <90 degree knockdown, little downflooding will result, certainly not enough to sink the boat...even with some hatches open.

Another thing... if it is ok to say the fact that some monohull boats with their hatches open could conceivably fill and sink in a knockdown and are thus unseaworthy ain't it kinda equivalent to saying that some multihull boats with too much sail up could conceivably be capsized by a big gust and thus are unseaworthy ?

I don't believe either of these statements, btw, I'm just examining the logic of some of the arguments presented above.

Jim

Sorry, I didn't realize everybody in this discussion had to stick to your definitions. Maybe you should list them at the beginning of every thread.

To me, rolling simply meant rolling. Could be 90 degrees, could be more, could be less.

But given that apparently rolling now means at least 180 degrees, I can certainly see why so many mono sailors whinge so bitterly about rolling at anchor or under sail! No wonder they sell so cheaply!

As for a ballasted mono popping up too quickly to flood through the hatches, the fact is mono's HAVE sunk after being knocked down (not rolled according to the new definition). I certainly remember in fairly recent times a modern production chartered bareboat sank this way. As did Bertie, of course.

And the whole point (which you seem to have missed either deliberately or not) of my posts has been that we DON'T condemn a whole category of sailboats because of these incidents. But when a catamaran crew leaves up too much sail for the conditions, somehow that's a fatal fault of the boat, and every other multihull, according to this forum.

[Jim Cate]

And the whole point (which you seem to have missed either deliberately or not) of my posts has been that we DON'T condemn a whole category of sailboats because of these incidents. But when a catamaran crew leaves up too much sail for the conditions, somehow that's the fault of the boat, according to this forum.

Crikey's mate... this forum has over 100K members I believe. There are a few who do indeed gloat over cat capsizes and other issues, but to accuse the whole lot of us with that attitude is pretty inaccurate IMO. I've noted that when such gloating pops up, there are a few cat people who feel compelled to do as you are doing: bring up monohull sinkings and point out that the mono is stablest when sitting on the bottom.

The whole thing is silly. I'd sure be happier if Sea Slug stopped posting pix of inverted cats and if you would stop whinging about monohull folks persecuting the cat folks.

The forum would be a happier place, and I would not be involved in such discussions ever again. I think I'd like that.

Jim

[JasonL]

Mention above of XL2.
Recent news, last few days, she has tipped over, s still floating, and all onboard rescued

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Crikey's mate... this forum has over 100K members I believe. There are a few who do indeed gloat over cat capsizes and other issues, but to accuse the whole lot of us with that attitude is pretty inaccurate IMO. I've noted that when such gloating pops up, there are a few cat people who feel compelled to do as you are doing: bring up monohull sinkings and point out that the mono is stablest when sitting on the bottom.

The whole thing is silly. I'd sure be happier if Sea Slug stopped posting pix of inverted cats and if you would stop whinging about monohull folks persecuting the cat folks.

The forum would be a happier place, and I would not be involved in such discussions ever again. I think I'd like that.

Jim

You are just as bad defending monohulls yet you point the finger a lot. Maybe you should follow your own advice?

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by smj

Wow, so about the same strength wind that flipped a 36’ catamaran sank a 136’ monohull that had over 150,000 blue water miles on her, and she was reefed down at the time. She got knocked flat, then rolled over and sank in less than 60 seconds.

There was some interesting discussion about the stability of the Pride of Baltimore in the aftermath of her capsizing. Unfortunately, the correct stability curve is far from clear but on my reading it appears the most likely AVS was around 83°.

If this is correct, the AVS was actually less than cruising catamarans.

Once knocked down she had little hope of ever recovering.

[Seaslug Caravan]

Originally Posted by JasonL

Mention above of XL2.
Recent news, last few days, she has tipped over, s still floating, and all onboard rescued

Blimey! that didn't take him long.


Ok enough of the thread drift.
Back to the Jim and 44c show.

[Sojourner]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

And the whole point (which you seem to have missed either deliberately or not) of my posts has been that we DON'T condemn a whole category of sailboats because of these incidents. But when a catamaran crew leaves up too much sail for the conditions, somehow that's a fatal fault of the boat, and every other multihull, according to this forum.

I should know better than to wade in, but I don't agree with the logic of this. A well-piloted Cat knowing to take in sail, sure, no capsize. A well-found mono knowing to keep the hatches shut on passage or when things get sketch, no sinking. But all things being equal, if god forbid conditions get bad enough that the cat or the mono has to take serious (and usually passive) action under survival conditions, and gets rolled through no further fault of anyone, I don't see how there can be a debate: A mono can get rolled and return upright all day long (sans mast most likely), and still provide a shelter. A cat can get rolled exactly once, and will stay there. Look no further than the fastnet race... most if not all the abandoned monos were found floating happily days after their crews suffered in their liferafts.

Note this is not addressing anything else but form/ballast stability. Yes a cat might outrun a system (not a cruising cat loaded down but that's another point). Yes a broken mast can poke a hole in the hull of a mono (but not if it can be cut away). But bottom line, I'd rather be inside a dismasted mono rolling like a washing machine than clinging to the keel of an overturned cat in the same sea conditions.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by tp12

You are just as bad defending monohulls yet you point the finger a lot. Maybe you should follow your own advice?

I dunno, mate. If you look carefully, I'm not "defending monohulls" nor am I denigrating multihulls. I'm trying to point out that the arguments given at great length are not supported by much logic and don't support the superiority of either form of boat. They both have advantages, they both have areas of risk, and either one poorly operated can kill you... and both have pretty good track records for getting their crews home safely. There are outliers on both sides, and some folks seem bent on equating them with the masses of boats that don't suffer sinking or flipping or any other grave situation. I honestly try to not make that sort of logical error. Perhaps I fail in my efforts, but I'm definitely not a zealot on either side.

There are a number of CFers who don't seem to be able to look at the differences without choosing sides and take all discussions personally. This is a sad situation, one which creates enmity and produces no increments of knowledge on either side.

I'd like it to be less emotional and divisive, but don't seem to be helping develop this condition, so I think I'll bow out now and leave it to you all to sort out.

Cheers,

Jim

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Sojourner

I should know better than to wade in, but I don't agree with the logic of this. A well-piloted Cat knowing to take in sail, sure, no capsize. A well-found mono knowing to keep the hatches shut on passage or when things get sketch, no sinking. But all things being equal, if god forbid conditions get bad enough that the cat or the mono has to take serious (and usually passive) action under survival conditions, and gets rolled through no further fault of anyone, I don't see how there can be a debate: A mono can get rolled and return upright all day long (sans mast most likely), and still provide a shelter. A cat can get rolled exactly once, and will stay there. Look no further than the fastnet race... most if not all the abandoned monos were found floating happily days after their crews suffered in their liferafts.

Note this is not addressing anything else but form/ballast stability. Yes a cat might outrun a system (not a cruising cat loaded down but that's another point). Yes a broken mast can poke a hole in the hull of a mono (but not if it can be cut away). But bottom line, I'd rather be inside a dismasted mono rolling like a washing machine than clinging to the keel of an overturned cat in the same sea conditions.

That's the theory anyway. The reality turned out different:

Multihull Dynamics, Inc. - News Article