forward cockpits and picture windows

[44'cruisingcat]

You may be confusing the Gunboat with another boat that was abandoned due to a bent rudder shaft.

IIRC the Gunboat was dismasted in a storm. It's very likely that when the rig came down it would have damaged the cabin top. And then it was left for over a year.

Anyway, as I said before, if that kind of boat doesn't appeal to you, don't buy one. Other people must like them, because they sell a few.

I seriously doubt your advocacy will stop manufacturers from building boats that sell.

[MoorOrLess]

Interesting but perhaps a controversial topic. Here are my thoughts.....
Race boats and cruising boat are built for different purposes and have different criteria. Comparisons between them are not really possible or relevant. The boats that raced in 79 Fastnet were designed and built to beat an IOR formula, not for seaworthiness. They had distorted hulls to “trick” the rating. My previous boat was in that 79 Fastnet race. While it has to be my favorite boat to sail, it was a long long way from stable or comfortable in big seas. Very low free board, wide flat sterns, and little buoyancy forward makes the bow bury into the wave and bring green water over the boat and into the cockpit. IOR boats relied on crew weight on the rail for stability, as ballast in the keel worked against the formula. Most never had windows, but they sailed partly like a submarine.
I may be just older now but I would much prefer to be in a cruising boat (mono or cat) than a race boat in a storm. Most boats ride over waves, not through them compared with the pure racing boats of the Admirals Cup IOR era. I have been in a 9m boat in Bass Strait riding out 11m seas in a storm. Most of the water coming into the cockpit was just what the wind ripped off the tops of those watery mountains. If we had still been racing then it might have been different, but running with it meant it was just an exciting ride. Only the top of the large waves tend to break out at sea (it is not like at the beach) the bulk of the wave still moves fast lifting the boat up and over.
My current boat (Cat) doesn’t have those large windows or forward cockpit mentioned by OP. I am yet to experience a bad storm in this boat but taking green water over the bow or stern would be very exceptional. White foaming water perhaps, but the buoyancy of the vessel would lift the boat over the green water.

[jmh2002]

Whilst I don't know all of the specifics of the Gunboat Rainmaker, an interesting point to consider is that this type of design should/could actually be safer than a normal charter boat type condo-maran in terms of salon/window/cockpit design.

Why do I say this? Well because I think that the Gunboat type 'open salon' is (or should be!) effectively just a big hard dodger and anything inside it should be considered to be either waterproof exterior equipment, or sacrificial in extreme conditions.

In normal use this also works well for a warm weather outdoor sailing lifestyle, and even the 'salon' can just be rinsed out or washed down as a normal part of the boat.

However most importantly the hulls themselves should still have totally watertight doors/hatches leading down into them which can be closed up to preserve watertight integrity if necessary, and the large open cockpit should be seriously self draining.

This is not the case in a normal condo-maran of course, where any water coming into the main salon for whatever reason (broken window, hatch, main doors, flooded cockpit from big stern wave, etc) just downfloods directly into the hulls - which is not very helpful. At least they should still be fitted with some nicely integrated hull companionway storm boards that can be used when required.

Possibly this Gunboat / Open type 'big hard dodger' should maybe even not be entirely structural in the first place, and maybe designed to give way to an extent, at least before damaging the integrity of the hulls.

In general I like and prefer the fully open salon cockpit design, at least for warm weather cruising, since one large open space makes the boat feel a lot bigger, and can prevent unnecessary duplication (eg: no need for an outside cockpit table, and an inside salon table, each a few feet from each other, on a 40 something footer... neither of them actually large enough for all the guests to sit at together), but safety should always be considered in the overall design of course.

At the other end of this design ethos are the Wharram catamarans, with their mostly open decks that water can pass through, minimal deck structures, and no 'salon windows' at all, at least not the type we are referring to here. But then people complain they don't have enough home comforts, so go figure...

The modern style fully open salon cockpit design could maybe serve as somewhat of a compromise between the two.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by owly

What do you think allowed the bridge deck cabin on rainmaker to be completely ripped off?... The ocean blew out the windows and got inside.... that's pretty obvious to anybody with any engineering background. Once the sea gets inside, it can exert pressures it couldn't otherwise.

Originally Posted by LeeV

I'd welcome the report that states, "The ocean blew out the windows and got inside.... that's pretty obvious to anybody with any engineering background."

From here: » rainmaker | Sailing Anarchy the Captain of Rainmaker states the following:

Originally Posted by Rainmaker Captain

CB: The boom and rig impacted and compressed the pilothouse port mullion above the companionway. This bent the port companionway sliding hatch frame so we can’t shut it all of the way. The port forward window is gone. We were getting rainwater and salt spray in the salon. The electronics and navigation at the helm and radio box are out. The aft enclosure tracks have blown out. Without being underway, we are getting some wave tops into the salon. The port companionway hatch could be an issue if seas get bigger. George checks the port hull bilges for water. There is none. The longeron appears stable. It is lower without the rig but the side and whiskers are supporting it. The electrical tech space with the genset’s charger/inverters has gotten some water through the cleared away mast electrical conduit. Starboard engine still isn’t rolling over. Comms are limited to the Sat phone which is working on its battery. The satphone charger is mounted at the navstation. It’s wet and doesn’t appear to be charging. Port prop is fouled by the storm jib sheets and the seas are too big to get in the water and free them. George, Jon and I have a load of cuts on our hands and knees from the glass, but no major injuries.

Originally Posted by Rainmaker Captain

CB: I went back to our damage assessment. The port companionway hatch is a concern without being able to close it. If we have to motor into a seaway, the longeron could be an issue and may need to be cutaway, but would be a huge risk trying to get that thing free. Port engine is out with the lines on the prop, and starboard is still having issues. The aft enclosure tracks are blown out. The cockpit and deck have broken glass and hydraulic fluid, the nav station electronics we’re all soaked. Two of the crew were potentially in shock. And the forecast weather coming in was looking pretty horrible.

This seems to indicate to me that on the one hand an open style boat (or any boat really but only open boats seem to bother) that has additional companionway hatches to protect the watertight integrity of the hull(s) is a good idea when everything goes totally wrong in a Rainmaker type scenario.

But in this case the hatch frame itself was actually damaged by the rig coming down preventing the hatch from closing properly and therefore no longer being watertight.

That's a difficult one, but ultimately this was an ultra high performance boat and whilst very strong under normal loads I doubt anyone considered 'hatch frame impact damage from rig collapse' in the structural scantlings for the companionways.

So in this case the blown out 'salon' windows or damaged deck cabin/hard dodger was a secondary issue not directly affecting the watertight integrity of the hulls.

In theory with this general design all the windows could blow out and the entire hard top/dodger could be lost but the hulls could remain intact and watertight. That actually seems quite helpful in survival conditions, or to simply prevent or delay a survival situation arising in the first place.

My thinking is reinforced that hopefully a blown out window on this type of open design only means that you just get more wet when on deck, so, similar to losing the common canvas type dodger on a monohull, this becomes unpleasant but doable.

And to me this would be much more preferable to the condo-maran scenario of one big picture window being blown out causing possible water ingress into the entire (not waterproofed part of the) boat.

NB: Probably Rainmaker was actually a bad example for the OP to use, since it is not really a condo-maran at all. Yes it had large picture windows, but they were not really part of the overall watertight integrity of the boat.

Food for thought in any case.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by MoorOrLess

Interesting but perhaps a controversial topic. Here are my thoughts.....
Race boats and cruising boat are built for different purposes and have different criteria. Comparisons between them are not really possible or relevant. The boats that raced in 79 Fastnet were designed and built to beat an IOR formula, not for seaworthiness. They had distorted hulls to “trick” the rating. My previous boat was in that 79 Fastnet race. While it has to be my favorite boat to sail, it was a long long way from stable or comfortable in big seas. Very low free board, wide flat sterns, and little buoyancy forward makes the bow bury into the wave and bring green water over the boat and into the cockpit. IOR boats relied on crew weight on the rail for stability, as ballast in the keel worked against the formula. Most never had windows, but they sailed partly like a submarine.
I may be just older now but I would much prefer to be in a cruising boat (mono or cat) than a race boat in a storm. Most boats ride over waves, not through them compared with the pure racing boats of the Admirals Cup IOR era. I have been in a 9m boat in Bass Strait riding out 11m seas in a storm. Most of the water coming into the cockpit was just what the wind ripped off the tops of those watery mountains. If we had still been racing then it might have been different, but running with it meant it was just an exciting ride. Only the top of the large waves tend to break out at sea (it is not like at the beach) the bulk of the wave still moves fast lifting the boat up and over.
My current boat (Cat) doesn’t have those large windows or forward cockpit mentioned by OP. I am yet to experience a bad storm in this boat but taking green water over the bow or stern would be very exceptional. White foaming water perhaps, but the buoyancy of the vessel would lift the boat over the green water.

This is a very often overlooked fact about performance catamarans. They simply have more buoyancy and less inertia due to lower mass.

Assuming perfectly identical monohulls, remove the keep from one and pretend it will stay upright.

Now put both through your killer storm waves. One acts like a submarine through steep waves, the other acts like a cork. If the buoyant force pushing up made by the steep wave can't overcome the inertia of the boat fast enough, you have green water aboard and you're in submarine mode to an extent.

If you have low inertia and high buoyancy, you don't get the green water or the submarine motion. You get the cork motion popping up an over the waves with a faster and more violent motion.

That's why you don't need to worry AS MUCH about green water over the boat and these windows being affected.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

No dog in this fight, but I'd point out that very, very few of those "thousands" of cats ever experience even full gales, let alone survival storms.

Ramtha survived the Queens Birthday storm, but she lacked the forward well and extreme forward windows or forward sliding doors, so not much of supporting evidence there.

Condo cats surely fill a need in the cruising boat world, but such design features as those under discussion do not add to their safety at sea.

Jim

But Jim this applies to most boats, monos and cats. Very ,very few of us ever sea a real storm. Cruising traditional routes , watching the weather and some common sense and travelling in the right season ,most will never see a gale let alone a storm.

Im having a beer tonight with a mate whos 200nm short if finishing his 12 year circumnavigation in his island spirit, hes seen very little bad weather because hes smart enough to avoid it.

These threads that such and such boats are unseaworthy just get silly. You just dont need a overbuilt, over heavy, slow double ended monohull to sail around the world, this is proved beyond a doubt every year by 100's of boats. Im seeing these boats, lagoons etc doing just fine in the real world.

I just got off a brand new Schoining 1200 arrow, weight 5000kg, many would suggest this isnt a boat to sail around the world, I would take it in a heart beat!

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by Chotu

This is a very often overlooked fact about performance catamarans. They simply have more buoyancy and less inertia due to lower mass.

Assuming perfectly identical monohulls, remove the keep from one and pretend it will stay upright.

Now put both through your killer storm waves. One acts like a submarine through steep waves, the other acts like a cork. If the buoyant force pushing up made by the steep wave can't overcome the inertia of the boat fast enough, you have green water aboard and you're in submarine mode to an extent.

If you have low inertia and high buoyancy, you don't get the green water or the submarine motion. You get the cork motion popping up an over the waves with a faster and more violent motion.

That's why you don't need to worry AS MUCH about green water over the boat and these windows being affected.

I love theory. The reality is theres so many variables at play when it goes to s.... that predicting the outcome based on what should happen on paper is laughable.

I know of a outreamer lost this year and a nice steel mono , many factors come into play.......including luck and fate.

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by daletournier

I love theory. The reality is theres so many variables at play when it goes to s.... that predicting the outcome based on what should happen on paper is laughable.

I know of a outreamer lost this year and a nice steel mono , many factors come into play.......including luck and fate.

Of course. That's why I put as much in all caps. Lol

Nothing is always the case. Just trending

[jmh2002]

You make your own luck, especially when 'out there', and mostly the more you do the luckier you get.

To be honest I'm not sure how some of the YouTubers are still alive. It shows how much wiggle room there is these days, actually how good even a basic boat is, plus of course modern weather forecasts, constant outside help, etc.

[mikereed100]

I think a distinction needs to be drawn between the forward cockpit and 'picture' windows on a Leopard and those of, for example, a Gunboat, Chris White, Lidgard or Oram. As I write this I am looking over my left shoulder at a Leopard 58. I admit it is a somewhat shocking sight, with what appear to be floor to ceiling vertical windows extending across the entire front of the cabin with a large door in the middle. The windage alone is enough to make me cringe. If I look over my right shoulder at the forward cockpit on my own boat the contrast is stark. It is just big enough for 2 people and I have to turn sideways and step over a one foot high lintel to pass through the door. The only vertical window is a 20" hatch. Those windows on the leopard may be designed and built to withstand a wave strike, but damn!

[owly]

Originally Posted by mikereed100

I think a distinction needs to be drawn between the forward cockpit and 'picture' windows on a Leopard and those of, for example, a Gunboat, Chris White, Lidgard or Oram. As I write this I am looking over my left shoulder at a Leopard 58. I admit it is a somewhat shocking sight, with what appear to be floor to ceiling vertical windows extending across the entire front of the cabin with a large door in the middle. The windage alone is enough to make me cringe. If I look over my right shoulder at the forward cockpit on my own boat the contrast is stark. It is just big enough for 2 people and I have to turn sideways and step over a one foot high lintel to pass through the door. The only vertical window is a 20" hatch. Those windows on the leopard may be designed and built to withstand a wave strike, but damn!

I consider large windows a dis qualifier when it comes to "blue water" sailing yachts. The idea that they are made to withstand a serious wave strike is an assertion that goes far beyond being merely dubious. Windows and hatches are extremely vulnerable, even small ones. Of course as was pointed out, few yachts ever encounter really dangerous weather, even while circumnavigating due to modern weather information, and of course in the case of a cat, presumably the sailing performance to be able avoid weather.


H.W.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

You may be confusing the Gunboat with another boat that was abandoned due to a bent rudder shaft..

From memory I think the bent rudder shaft boat was the first Alpha 42? In 2014, abandoned 300 miles off North Carolina and washed up on a beach in Scotland 3 years later.

[mikereed100]

Originally Posted by owly

I consider large windows a dis qualifier when it comes to "blue water" sailing yachts. The idea that they are made to withstand a serious wave strike is an assertion that goes far beyond being merely dubious. Windows and hatches are extremely vulnerable, even small ones. Of course as was pointed out, few yachts ever encounter really dangerous weather, even while circumnavigating due to modern weather information, and of course in the case of a cat, presumably the sailing performance to be able avoid weather.

Being on the conservative side myself, I tend to agree with you. Before I got the multihull bug in the 70's my dream cruising boat was a Westsail 32. That said, I have to admit that a boat like the Leopard, sailed conservatively and paying attention to the forecasts, would have to be very unfortunate to encounter weather that would endanger the windows. If caught, for some reason, in a survival storm, I imagine the preferred tactic would be to run off with a drogue rather than heave to or lie to parachute. Another situation that could be problematic is in crossing a river bar with the swell up, but that is not sailing conservatively.

While not my cup of tea, I have to admit that, if sailed as intended, these boats are probably very safe. I too, would not want to take one offshore, but I suspect that it is likely that my fears are unfounded.

[GRIT]

Yes, big windows are a worry, and I don't like that leopard 58 at all. Though it's amazing how our opinions, with age and experience, will change.

I'm with you, Mike. I'll bet your old self would be appalled at the size of the windows on Rum Doxy. Just as my old self would berate a fellow who would put windows larger than a dinner plate on a boat.

Though, after two ocean crossings, and seeing the plethora of boats, especially cats, crossing with huge windows, and all sorts of other "non bluewater" things on their boats: cluttered decks, dinghy davits with dinghies hanging from them, no storm sails, no parachute or drogues, tiny anchors, no SSB, little navigation knowledge, no paper charts...and the list goes on.

I've changed my tune somewhat, as the windows on our new boat are huge.

I've now replaced some of my "offshore" cruising preferences with: Near unsinkability, speed to outrun weather, big dinghy for comfort at anchor, large sails with electric winches, inside steering, large living platform... and a plethora of "comforts" and technology I would have turned my nose up at, 20 years ago.

The world progresses, and what was required 50 years ago is seldom the case now. Soon, you won't even need a steering wheel in your car. Tell that to your younger self, say 20 years ago.

Come to think of it, Cats were a nono for offshore work, now they're quite well accepted, by most.

Horses for courses, I've been proven wrong often enough to know, that what I dislike now, may one day be my preference. And what I thought was absolutely necessary, back in the day, is sometimes not so much, now.

Cheers.
Paul.

[Jim Cate]

Not saying that this proves anything, and it involves a motor cat, not a sailing one, but here goes:

A few years back we were on the Clarence River in NSW, Oz. In the marina at Yamba a motor cat came in in some disarray with the forward windows blown in. The boat was on its way to Sydney to be exhibited in a boat show and was being driven pretty hard, trying to stay on schedule. Going to windward in only moderate conditions, a larger than average wave caught them in a bow down attitude and struck the forward face of the house and the windows failed and the boat was flooded. Didn't sink, for the crew responded well, reducing speed and turning back (down wind/sea) and entering the nearest port. The delivery crew wasn't very impressed with the construction and design of the boat! I suspect that the owner wasn't too impressed either...

Jim