forward cockpits and picture windows

[tp12]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

I think you have misunderstood my comment, but thank you for your rudeness anyway.

No, I havenlt. It's you who has missed the point and your post above proves it. Which I'll rubbish in a moment.

If you think I'm being disrespectful to you perhaps you can ponder the impact of your position on multi sailors who are sick of hearing rubbish along the lines that you've spouted.

With respect, of course.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by quackedo

OK, my 2 cents. I think that we "Old Timers" in our slow, dark, heavy double enders are concerned with is another Fastnet situation being set up by many current designs. Those IOR boats were sailing all over the planet, but when faced with real harsh wrather, their inherent unseaworthy flaws became tragically apparent on an all encompassing scale. Many of these lightweight boats are crossing oceans and the concern is for the time when actual weather catches several at once and we have a similar tragedy as before. The logic of "We're getting away with it everywhere" doesn't make it right or safe as has been sadly proven in the past. .

The fastnet and 98 sydney to hobart arent valid arguments. They knew weather was coming in the 98 race but they chose to race,they could of pulled in, some did.

As a fulltime cruiser you just dont put yourself in those situations. Yer, sure weather can come up BUT if you arent in the wrong place in the wrong season you are very unlikely to be caught in a powerful life threatning storm.

I travelled down the south african coast this year, we missed all bad weather as did 18 other boats i cruised with. A couple of boats that chose to be less careful (had less fear than me) did get caught out and had some nasty days, most, if not all really bad weather can be avoided by a cautious modern sailor sailing the traditional around the world routes.

This dosent mean you avoid all bad weather, ive seen gales BUT life threatning storms or weather a modern well maintained boat cant manage is unlikely IF one follows general rules , has patience, dosent sail to a schedule and has a healthy respect for nature.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by tp12

No, I havenlt. It's you who has missed the point and your post above proves it. Which I'll rubbish in a moment.

If you think I'm being disrespectful to you perhaps you can ponder the impact of your position on multi sailors who are sick of hearing rubbish along the lines that you've spouted.

With respect, of course.

Um... I am a multihull sailor, too, so I'm not sure what you are talking about? And you can even see my other posts in this thread in that regard.

But in survival conditions (at sea) I would still not recommend surfing as a survival tactic, and I think that I am good company there.

Your comment about crossing a bar is unrelated.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by quackedo

OK, one last thing... If you knew that you were going to be caught by a severe, several day storm at sea with huge breaking seas and howling winds, would you rather be in a Valiant, 40, any Beneteau, or any Catamaran? Be honest. I'd be eating my "waffles" safely on the Valiant.

1/ your a fool to put yourself in that position.

2/I would choose the best maintained boat. Condition matters, many old boats are in poor condition therefore not as simple as your suggesting.

3/I would choose a well designed cat with very little to trip over before Id choose a 35 year OLD valiant. Btw i sail a monohull and have experienced bad weather.

4/What percentage of around the world (traditional routes) sailors do you think ever see a true storm, not a strong blow, not a gale but a true storm that lasts days?

[tp12]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

And as a general note to throw in the mix here, most crew give up before the boat does. So many boats are abandoned because crew have had enough and just want to 'get off'.

The first 15mins of the following video is catamaran Ramtha during the infamous 1994 queens birthday weekend storm in the south pacific. Given the extreme survival conditions (70 knots of wind and 40 foot seas) she is handling it pretty well and was found a week later, still upright, and was recovered.

Many monohulls were rolled, and this was when the conventional wisdom of 'but we will come back up and be alright' went out the window. Yes the monohulls came back up, but they were far from 'alright'.

Most of the catamarans fared far better (and should probably not have been abandoned in the first place).

More info here: Multihull Dynamics, Inc. - News Article

That storm was 973Hpa .... a proper low 'bomb' and not a typical storm. Let's look at how monos fared, from your own article! Crikey....talk about confirmation bias.

The following is a quick rundown of all 7 monos, their crews, and what happened to each of them." Also an analysis of the monohulls condensed: "Five things stand out from the experience of the seven monohulls:

1) Despite all efforts, it was virtually impossible to keep the boats from ending up beam-to the seas, which resulted in five of the boats being repeatedly knocked down or rolled.

2) Despite trailing drogues, two of the boats pitchpoled.

3) No matter if the seven monohulls pitchpoled or rolled, all of them lost their masts.

4) As a result of the pitchpoles, knockdowns, and rollovers, many of the crews suffered serious injuries.

4) Having a ship come alongside to effect a rescue was extremely difficult and dangerous for everyone involved.

5) Perhaps the most amazing thing is how well the seven boats held up to the unthinkably horrible conditions; had it not been for scuttling or collisions with rescuing ships, six of them would have continued to float. The age-old admonition to never leave a boat until it's underwater would seem as true as ever."

Now, the Multis:

"Now for the catamarans: "Ramtha, a 38-foot Roger Simpson designed modern-style catamaran from Australia, with a husband and wife crew with five years of coastal cruising experience and some offshore experience: The crew had set a drogue several days before the storm to fix her steering, but had to cut it loose when they were unable to pull it back up. Ultimately, they found themselves in 70 knots of wind and 40 foot seas, conditions so bad that the 4,000-ton ship Monowai, coming to their rescue, rolled as much as 48 in each direction, injuring three of her crew.

Despite four reefs, Ramtha's main blew to shreds and her steering system became inoperable. With nothing but her twin engines available for maneuvering, being aboard her was like "going down a mountain in a wooden box" or being on a "roller coaster that never stopped." The boat slid down waves forward, sideways, and backwards. Several times it seemed as though she might flip, but she never did. Ultimately, Monowai shot a line to Ramtha's crew, but missed. While the line gun was being reloaded, Ramtha's crew began to get strong second thoughts about leaving the boat, feeling he was doing fine on her own despite being crippled. Nonetheless, they attached their harnesses when the second line landed on their boat, and were dragged several hundred feet -often underwater -to and up the side of the ship. After abandoning the cat, the owners gave her up for lost. A week or so later, they were stunned to learn that the boat had been found, upright and in surprisingly good shape! After settling a salvage claim with another yachtie, they eventually sailed her back to Oz where they began rebuilding the cruising kitty. !!!!!!! What? The boat was fine!

Heart Light, a 41-foot Catalac U.S.-based catamaran with a crew of four; a husband and wife couple with 16,000 ocean miles, and two crew with no offshore experience: Despite having 16,000 miles ocean experience, the captain and wife claimed to have not steered the boat except near the dock and to have never jibed between the States and New Zealand. Heart Light was a heavy, solid fiberglass, narrow catamaran. Nevertheless, she did reasonably well, surfing at between 6 and 13 knots while dragging a drogue. When the autopilot couldn't handle it any longer, the skipper finally learned how to steer, working desperately to prevent waves from slewing the stern in front of the bow.

Eventually, both engines went down and lines fouled both rudders. They tied off the helm to port and slid sideways down waves. Despite being "captapulted" through the air on many occasions and being knocked onto one hull several other times, she endured. When the rescue ship arrived, her captain noted that the boat "appeared seaworthy and was riding comfortably in the improved weather." When the captain said he couldn't tow the boat, Heart Light's first mate, a New Age visionary, talked the ship's captain into a weird agreement: they would only allow themselves to be rescued if he promised to ram Heart Light until she sank. The woman's theory was that the sinking boat would be a lighthouse guiding the forces of good through seven layers of reality into our currently evil world. Something like that and yes, she wrote a book. The ship's captain complied, and Heart Light sank after being rammed several times. Whaaaaaaat? Keraaazy woman!

The third catamaran, a 40-footer, carried a deeply reefed main and furled jib in slightly lighter conditions outside of the core. She experienced no serious problems. There are several interesting things about the two catamarans in the core area of the storm:

1) Neither of them pitchpoled;

2) Neither of them flipped- although the crews thought they came close;

3) Neither of them were dismasted;

) Both of them apparently would have survived - by surfing forwards, sideways, and backwards- had they just been left alone.

"

Source: Multihull Dynamics, Inc. - News Article ... if you challenge this, let's see your evidence.

The storm you quote does not prove, in any way, shape or form, that monos are safer in this level of storm. In fact, it leans towards multis being safer. Who could sail away After. The monos with no mast and broken crew? Or the multis with masts still in tact?

I'm tempted to say "Sit down, you're drunk" ������

[tp12]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

Um... I am a multihull sailor, too, so I'm not sure what you are talking about? And you can even see my other posts in this thread in that regard.

But in survival conditions (at sea) I would still not recommend surfing as a survival tactic, and I think that I am good company there.

Your comment about crossing a bar is unrelated.

It's not unrelated at all. You've obviously never encountered a proper bar before in unfriendly conditions.

And again, you still clearly have no clue abuot multis and surfing and the advantages to be had. Instead of steadfastly ignoring it, open your mind. You might learn something, even though you're a multi sailor too.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by tp12

No, I havenlt. It's you who has missed the point and your post above proves it. Which I'll rubbish in a moment.

If you think I'm being disrespectful to you perhaps you can ponder the impact of your position on multi sailors who are sick of hearing rubbish along the lines that you've spouted. [emoji3]

With respect, of course.

Hi Tp12, ignorance is ignorance, I see it on both sides . Im on a biggish mono which I really like, its a great boat BUT theres cats I very much admire as well and would love to own. People get stuck in their prejudices. Most mono guys I know dont dislike cats it seems more prevalent on the forums.

Btw I hear how my inmast furlers no good, my boat flex's when in bad weather (??), my keel will fall off, my spade rudder is no good etc etc, its a wonder Im still alive ..lol.

Many take a postion and fail to be flexible.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by tp12

The storm you quote does not prove, in any way, shape or form, that monos are safer in this level of storm. In fact, it leans towards multis being safer. Who could sail away After. The monos with no mast and broken crew? Or the multis with masts still in tact?

I'm tempted to say "Sit down, you're drunk" ������

When did I ever try to 'prove, in any way, shape or form, that monos are safer in this level of storm' ?

Do you realise that I posted that video and the link in the first place exactly to suggest the opposite (in support of multihulls)! Please see again what I actually wrote:

Originally Posted by jmh2002

Given the extreme survival conditions (70 knots of wind and 40 foot seas) she is handling it pretty well and was found a week later, still upright, and was recovered.

Many monohulls were rolled, and this was when the conventional wisdom of 'but we will come back up and be alright' went out the window. Yes the monohulls came back up, but they were far from 'alright'.

Most of the catamarans fared far better (and should probably not have been abandoned in the first place).

So I really dont know what you are talking about? I think you may have me confused with someone else.

Originally Posted by tp12

It's not unrelated at all. You've obviously never encountered a proper bar before in unfriendly conditions.

I have crossed plenty of bars, even Coffs and others on the east coast.

But crossing a bar is not the same as 'survival conditions at sea' which is what I was referring to, and what I stated. Hence it's not related to my comments.

Now, this has gotten way of topic...

[tp12]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

When did I ever try to 'prove, in any way, shape or form, that monos are safer in this level of storm' ?

I posted that video and the link in the first place exactly to suggest the opposite! See what I actually wrote:



So I really dont know what you are talking about? I think you may have me confused with someone else.



I have crossed plenty of bars, even Coffs and others on the east coast.

But crossing a bar is not the same as 'survival conditions at sea' which is what I was referring to, and what I stated. Hence it's not related to my comments.

Watch the Bullfrog video and tell me that again ...... Multis can surf safely when most monos can't. You made that point, own it, instead of wobbling around.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by tp12

Watch the Bullfrog video and tell me that again ...... Multis can surf safely when most monos can't. You made that point, own it, instead of wobbling around.

When did I make this point? I never wrote that, or even inferred that.
As I originally said, I think you misunderstood me.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

When did I ever try to 'prove, in any way, shape or form, that monos are safer in this level of storm' ?

Do you realise that I posted that video and the link in the first place exactly to suggest the opposite (in support of multihulls)!

You are absolutely right, regarding that article, I apologise.

However you're not correct regarding the bar crossing I mentioned and, please, watch it before replying. You'll see police boats and helicopters waiting because they considered it so dangerous but Bullfrog just rolled in and hardly even looked to cop any spray.

[tp12]

Originally Posted by jmh2002

When did I make this point? I never wrote that, or even inferred that.
As I originally said, I think you misunderstood me.

No, I didn't. It's referring to your bar crossing/surfing comments. See my recent post.

[jmh2002]

Of course a multi will surf better than a mono in that and almost any other situation (I never said otherwise or even discussed this in my comments).

I don't have any argument about the bar crossing and didn't even discuss it except to say that it wasn't relevant to my comments about survival conditions out at sea (a bar isn't even out at sea, it's on the coast).

Hence my original comment (in reference to another user's post):

Originally Posted by jmh2002

Sorry, but in 'really bad weather' and/or survival conditions the last thing a cruising catamaran should be doing is 'skating down waves ahead of the crest'...

A boat in Ramtha's situation is not going to surf it's way out of trouble 'ahead of the crests' in 70kn and 40ft seas in the middle of the pacific with a cruising couple onboard.

Long before that point it would have been prudent to dial back and go into survival mode, as Ramtha did, in their case lying to a sea anchor/drogue.

These tactics served them well and protected the boat, and probably they did not need to abandon in the first place, but fortunately the boat was later recovered.

Originally Posted by tp12

You are absolutely right, regarding that article, I apologise.

Thanks. Let's not discuss this further and get back on topic.

[jmh2002]

Originally Posted by thinwater

To me, the question is will you ever get breaking waves against the front of the cabin. For me, the answer was yes, it happened in the wake of a huricane. The windows were small (PDQ 32/34) and no fuss. I had green water on the salon roof a few times. A lightweight forward facing door? Just nuts for ocean work.

This good post got lost in the mix on the previous page, and needs some consideration too.

[44'cruisingcat]

[QUOTE=daletournier;2770170]The fastnet and 98 sydney to hobart arent valid arguments. They knew weather was coming in the 98 race but they chose to race,they could of pulled in, some did.

[r/QUOTE]

Yes, and another reason the 98 Sydney-Hobart is a poor choice to support their argument, is that the lightweight faster boats actually fared better than the old, "solid" heavyweights.