Garcia Explocat 52 -- fitting high lat requirements?

[frederic_b]

Looked everywhere and couldn't find any recent thread regarding so-called 'exploration' cat. So I post this as I'm thinking about going after the new Explocat 52 from Garcia. The plan has evolved : after 10 years sailing the Med inside out (that's over 22.000 miles) on a Lagoon 450, we’re planning to go farther including high latitude sailing, both South and North. But of course we plan just as well tropical sailing, both Atlantic and Pacific. At this stage we do not plan NW passage.
So the big buck questions : how does this boat fits the description, appart from its ability to wear double-glazed windows (+400kg)? What can be said about recent Garcia construction -- as it has changed quite a lot from its 'one-off' older time? Generally speaking, how would you feel about a rugged aluminum cat?

[Steamer]

Originally Posted by frederic_b

... how would you feel about a rugged aluminum cat?

Have nothing against rugged alu cat, but do not feel GE52 is a kind of.

Described by just nice words with pictures of shiny interior, large "jacuzzi" in front of salon ..., does not show her real high latitude capabilities.

Knowing that the Yard was taken over by "investors" rather then shiprights also does not add confidence this cat if once built by new Garcia according to what is drawn by designers, will exactly fit the bill of high latitude sailing.

Seen march more clearly identified real high lat sailing cat from other Naval Architects.

[frederic_b]

Yes, interestinghly the investors are having under the same umbrella Outremer and Gunboat, both very convincing catamaran range.
Would Jimmy Cornell do a journey on the Explocat 52, as he did on the Exploration 45 (including the NW passage I think)? Both are supposed to be built along the same standards, no?

[mcarthur]

We reckon we've got a rugged alu cat - a powercat though, not sail . Maybe have a look at the Meta/ProMeta shipyard's Flotteur and Banana boats.

[frederic_b]

Originally Posted by mcarthur

We reckon we've got a rugged alu cat - a powercat though, not sail . Maybe have a look at the Meta/ProMeta shipyard's Flotteur and Banana boats.

I know I had a quite candid question up there, but one could question the usefulness of some answer: the sail area/displacement ratio of this project is way more favorable than many existing and indubitably sailing catamaran, including mine. Plus it doesnt have the engines for a power cat. Plus what's the use of a carbon rigging if not for sailing.
Ok, maybe you meant it's not a racing or even a performance cat, like the latest Outremer for instance.
Well, I don't plan to go racing arount south Georgia either. But I'd be looking for strenghts, safety and protection, on top a seaworthiness.

[Steamer]

Originally Posted by frederic_b

But I'd be looking for strenghts, safety and protection, on top a seaworthiness.

Pictures of alu yacht from well known yard during her sailing in northern waters.

[arsenelupiga]

Originally Posted by frederic_b

Looked everywhere and couldn't find any recent thread regarding so-called 'exploration' cat. So I post this as I'm thinking about going after the new Explocat 52 from Garcia. The plan has evolved : after 10 years sailing the Med inside out (that's over 22.000 miles) on a Lagoon 450, we’re planning to go farther including high latitude sailing, both South and North. But of course we plan just as well tropical sailing, both Atlantic and Pacific. At this stage we do not plan NW passage.
So the big buck questions : how does this boat fits the description, appart from its ability to wear double-glazed windows (+400kg)? What can be said about recent Garcia construction -- as it has changed quite a lot from its 'one-off' older time? Generally speaking, how would you feel about a rugged aluminum cat?

I think mono is better for the purpose because mono will take more pounding after grounded, than cat. Cat is bigger object than mono and waves generate considerably more power to punctuate or worse. Going exploration, one should expect groundings. Apart from that reason, I am all for this cat. One can often taylor exploration plan to minimize grounding risk.

[mcarthur]

Originally Posted by frederic_b

I know I had a quite candid question up there, but one could question the usefulness of some answer: the sail area/displacement ratio of this project is way more favorable than many existing and indubitably sailing catamaran, including mine. Plus it doesnt have the engines for a power cat. Plus what's the use of a carbon rigging if not for sailing.
Ok, maybe you meant it's not a racing or even a performance cat, like the latest Outremer for instance.
Well, I don't plan to go racing arount south Georgia either. But I'd be looking for strenghts, safety and protection, on top a seaworthiness.

You've clearly got lots of experience on cats in the Med.

I wasn't suggesting an aluminium powercat for you, merely indicating there are other options including some that use different aluminium techniques (lookup StrongAll).

I was trying to suggest there are other aluminium sail boats (monos and cats) designed for cold which was in line with your original on the Explocat. Dashew is another with cold bluewater experience if you like your boats long(!), and you can go sail or power as well. Out there. Doing it. Done it.

So I'm perplexed as to your response, and what it actually says/means...

The Explocat first hull was started, as far as I could find out, mid last year. In comparison, the other references I gave to aluminium sailing cats have been made by companies that have been doing it for decades with many boats out there "doing it". The voyage of at least one of the Banana 43 is well documented (and fascinating). Garcia are a good known yard, but not for cats.



Your final question revisited in case I wasn't clear: Generally speaking, how would you feel about a rugged aluminum cat?
A clearer answer perhaps: absolutely fantastic . I wouldn't buy new. And we (like Dashew ) chose power over sail (in many icy climes you'll motor more often than sail).

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by frederic_b

Looked everywhere and couldn't find any recent thread regarding so-called 'exploration' cat. So I post this as I'm thinking about going after the new Explocat 52 from Garcia. The plan has evolved : after 10 years sailing the Med inside out (that's over 22.000 miles) on a Lagoon 450, we’re planning to go farther including high latitude sailing, both South and North. But of course we plan just as well tropical sailing, both Atlantic and Pacific. At this stage we do not plan NW passage.
So the big buck questions : how does this boat fits the description, appart from its ability to wear double-glazed windows (+400kg)? What can be said about recent Garcia construction -- as it has changed quite a lot from its 'one-off' older time? Generally speaking, how would you feel about a rugged aluminum cat?

For high latitudes you want:


1. extremely rugged construction to withstand hitting ice and the odd rock in uncharted waters


2. extreme autonomy, so abundant tankage (diesel fuel in the tonnes) and redundant systems


3. half the hull volume or more devoted to technical space, workshop, storage for the tonne or tonnes of spare parts, tools, supplies, and gear you will need.


4. ability to deal with extreme weather and sea states, which is more common and harder to avoid in high latitudes





That boat ticks none of my personal boxes, for sailing in high latitudes.



It's pretty hard to travel light to high latitudes; so for this reason alone, it's not a good use case for a catamaran.


Now I assume you're talking about real high latitudes -- Arctic Ocean, Southern Ocean, and not just a bit of Iceland and Norway. If that's not what you mean, then ignore my post.

[GordMay]

Greetings and welcome aboard the CF, Frederic.

[frederic_b]

So, to summarize at this stage

1. extremely rugged construction to withstand hitting ice and the odd rock in uncharted waters
That’s the purpose of aluminium. I’ve checked Meta, even wrote them, but clearly it’d be a more obvious choice going after a monohull -- A smaller ‘Fleur Australe’ would be nice :-)
Fact is a ‘one-off’ approach is more time & cash-consuming, so I'd rather go after a range, even at it's early stage (agreed, hull #1 not yet being is the water maked it questionable)
As for Garcia, I can’t find the Aluminium grade used in their range. I take it Jimmy Cornell, who co-designed their initial exploration boat to NW passage grade had it as it should be.

2. extreme autonomy, so abundant tankage (diesel fuel in the tonnes) and redundant systems
Fuel: what should the be the “under fuel range”? (not taking into account heating use). It seems the Explorer 52 has 1660 l. Capacity, and twin 75hp.
As for the rest, yes, I’m currently designing twin watermakers, twin autopilot, twin heating system (one being a Reflex-type stove), twin engines (thus the cat search), solar/wind/hydro electricity-production systems, twin anchors (in front), twin winlass.
I checked the Banana 43 catamaran. Although I’d feel fine in a 43 monohull, I was under the impression I’d need a bigger cat to feel safe.
Plus this size brings lots of limitation on weight, thus systems duplication, double-glazed window (on this boat it’d bring over 300 kg, no?) etc

3. half the hull volume or more devoted to technical space, workshop, storage for the tonne or tonnes of spare parts, tools, supplies, and gear you will need.
‘Half or more’, to what boat size does it apply?
On a 52 cat, that’s indeed a lot of volume.
I spend lots of time on Pelagic and f the likes boat description. They seem to be on a lower ratio, as they do bring along some crew as well :-)
Maybe it was just to make the point, and, yes, there must be all essential spare on-board (with key-systems duplicated, that’s partly dealt-from). On a 52 cat, there are two very large forward spaces, one cabin that can be partly devoted to inside workbench (but we usually do this outside in the very large protected cockpit), in top of the back spaces. Having already quite a lot of spare on a 45 cat, that wouldn't be my main concern on a 52 cat.

4. ability to deal with extreme weather and sea states, which is more common and harder to avoid in high latitudes
That’s my the main concern, as I don't have much experience of really heavy sea and winds over 50kn (I try to avoid these whenever possible). So I'm just trying to guess from wat I know: the Explocat 52 is 7 feet longer but same beam as my current cat. And it looks way more efficient on windage (my main issue.
I’ve read most of the high latitude catamaran stories that are out there. It raises rigging questions as well, sailing practices (reefing with strong wind from the back) and safety questions as well.

As a (5), I'd add all the anchoring systems you're seing on high latitude boats, including long lines, duplicated anchors etc. What lenght/strenght (thus weight) should be the lines for sucha boat ? What main anchor size ? (read like 60 kg for stong winds oversized, but wouldn't have the experience).

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by frederic_b

So, to summarize at this stage

1. extremely rugged construction to withstand hitting ice and the odd rock in uncharted waters
That’s the purpose of aluminium. I’ve checked Meta, even wrote them, but clearly it’d be a more obvious choice going after a monohull -- A smaller ‘Fleur Australe’ would be nice :-)
Fact is a ‘one-off’ approach is more time & cash-consuming, so I'd rather go after a range, even at it's early stage (agreed, hull #1 not yet being is the water maked it questionable)
As for Garcia, I can’t find the Aluminium grade used in their range. I take it Jimmy Cornell, who co-designed their initial exploration boat to NW passage grade had it as it should be.

2. extreme autonomy, so abundant tankage (diesel fuel in the tonnes) and redundant systems
Fuel: what should the be the “under fuel range”? (not taking into account heating use). It seems the Explorer 52 has 1660 l. Capacity, and twin 75hp.
As for the rest, yes, I’m currently designing twin watermakers, twin autopilot, twin heating system (one being a Reflex-type stove), twin engines (thus the cat search), solar/wind/hydro electricity-production systems, twin anchors (in front), twin winlass.
I checked the Banana 43 catamaran. Although I’d feel fine in a 43 monohull, I was under the impression I’d need a bigger cat to feel safe.
Plus this size brings lots of limitation on weight, thus systems duplication, double-glazed window (on this boat it’d bring over 300 kg, no?) etc

3. half the hull volume or more devoted to technical space, workshop, storage for the tonne or tonnes of spare parts, tools, supplies, and gear you will need.
‘Half or more’, to what boat size does it apply?
On a 52 cat, that’s indeed a lot of volume.
I spend lots of time on Pelagic and f the likes boat description. They seem to be on a lower ratio, as they do bring along some crew as well :-)
Maybe it was just to make the point, and, yes, there must be all essential spare on-board (with key-systems duplicated, that’s partly dealt-from). On a 52 cat, there are two very large forward spaces, one cabin that can be partly devoted to inside workbench (but we usually do this outside in the very large protected cockpit), in top of the back spaces. Having already quite a lot of spare on a 45 cat, that wouldn't be my main concern on a 52 cat.

4. ability to deal with extreme weather and sea states, which is more common and harder to avoid in high latitudes
That’s my the main concern, as I don't have much experience of really heavy sea and winds over 50kn (I try to avoid these whenever possible). So I'm just trying to guess from wat I know: the Explocat 52 is 7 feet longer but same beam as my current cat. And it looks way more efficient on windage (my main issue.
I’ve read most of the high latitude catamaran stories that are out there. It raises rigging questions as well, sailing practices (reefing with strong wind from the back) and safety questions as well.

As a (5), I'd add all the anchoring systems you're seing on high latitude boats, including long lines, duplicated anchors etc. What lenght/strenght (thus weight) should be the lines for sucha boat ? What main anchor size ? (read like 60 kg for stong winds oversized, but wouldn't have the experience).

These are just my personal opinions and judgements so take them wiht a grain of salt. They were just intended to give you something to think about.


I have limited experience with catamarans, so for extreme weather you will have to ask others with more experience. I'm sure someone down under can tell you what it's like to sail a cat in the Southern Ocean, what the techniques are, whether or not it's a good idea.

With a strong monohull, you can trail a JSD, batten everything down, go below, and survive basically anything without doing anything heroic and without risking anyone's life on deck. A knock-down need not be life threatening. What do you do with a cat? I don't know, but it's worth finding out before you commit to doing this on a cat, because in place like the Southern Ocean you do really need to be ready for F10 -- that kind of weather comes regularly with the weather they have there and on a long passage you can't be sure of avoiding it. The Southern Ocean has unlimited fetch, too. In the high N Atlantic we have similar problems and some inherently dangerous spots like the waters off Kap Farvel, and the Western Approaches, but the Southern Ocean is another level bigger challenge so worth concentrating on that.

As to anchoring systems -- there is good reading material in the interwebs on this. Anchoring is a huge challenge and requires a lot of gear. You want the biggest anchor you can conceivably handle and with backups, and you need shore ties -- most high latitude boats carry large reels of polyprop on their foredecks for making shore ties. My dedicated high latitude boat would not have a cruising-boat like anchoring set-up -- it would look more like a commercial work boat, with massive horizontal windlass, abundant amounts of chain, massively strong sampson post. All this adds up to a lot of weight. I would want a best bower anchor of maybe 100kg for a 65' boat.


The anchoring I did in Greenland was by far the most challenging I've ever done anywhere. There are no harbors and no place to hide, and due to the mountainous terrain, the bottom slopes down steeply. If you get into trouble at anchor you can't even go out to sea, as there is ice in the water. We were rarely anchored in less than 25 or 30 meters of water, and the bottom was rarely very good. If we'd had one of the violent katabatic storms which occur there, I'm afraid we would have been in trouble with our 100 pound Space and 100 meters of 12mm chain. We were lucky, but I won't count on luck next time. Nor are there rescue services up there, so you risk your neck and not just your boat.


Concerning tankage -- you may need to motor for days because the other bane of high latitudes, besides violent storms, is long periods of dead calm. We motored 90% of the way from Iceland to Greenland and back (in those waters a dead calm is a nice weather window). Then you need to run the heating and you need to generate electricity. In the Arctic cold, a lot of fuel goes into the heating system. I carry a bit less than a tonne of fuel on this boat; it was not enough -- we ended up with the horror of jerry cans, still had to do a difficult and laborious jerry can refueling in Ittoqqoortomit, and even then it was a near run thing. For this boat I would want maybe 2 tonnes of fuel or at the very least 1.5; for a bigger boat correspondingly more.


Concerning storage -- the volume of spare parts and tools you need to be really autonomous in remote high latitude places is totally different from normal cruising. Redundancy in systems doesn't really solve that problem (although the twin propulsion of catamarans is a very big plus) -- you still need spares for everything and you still need every conceivable tool you will need to make any conceivable repair. You need a good place to work. You need space to store a summer's worth or more of supplies. If you are climbing or exploring on land (and what's the point of going there if you're not), you need to store all that gear too. Based on my one summer in Greenland, my proper high latitude boat would be at least 65' long, and would have at least half of the hull volume devoted to technical space and storage. Would the volume in a 52' cat be enough for all? I dunno. And the answer probably also depends a lot on how many crew (and I would not do high latitudes short-handed). But not laid out the that one is, to my taste. YMMV. And remember also that volume and load carrying capacity are two entirely different things. Even if you have the space, doesn't necessarily mean you can carry the weight.


I like catamarans and seriously thought about buying an Atlantic 57 myself at one time. But it seems to me that cats are more like sports cars (A57), or more like condos (Lagoon etc.), and are at an inherent disadvantage when you need great hull strength and need to carry large loads. The hull material by itself doesn't make a massively strong hull -- it's the scantlings. Those kind of scantlings mean even more weight on top of the weight of all the gear, supplies, tankage. For high latitudes you need a truck, not a sports car, and I'm not sure whether a catamaran can really be made into a truck. But as I said -- I'm not an expert on catamarans so you should do your own reading and make up your own mind. I'm just trying to give you something to think about.

[gosstyla]

You may want to check with Alwoplast in Valdivia, Chile. www.alwoplast.cl

They build, or at least did in past, both power and sail cats suited for some degree of Southern Ocean exploring.

[Breaking Waves]

There have been quite a number of relatively 'standard' catamarans both thru the NorthWest Passage and down to the Antarctic peninsula.

I believe the first thru the NWP was a Fountaine Pajot Salina 48. But there have been quite a number since.

It is 'possible' to do these things in pretty minimal craft, with the right skipper and attitude. And both have been done in what are essentially strengthened beach cats - like Satellite and Babouche.

The only real requirement is that the vessel structure be strong enough to handle the fatigue cycles - assuming carefully handling from the skipper and some at-sea repairs ( we have a friend who did the nor pacific on a beach cat and he made landfall with the whole thing wrapped in dyneema cord with Spanish windlasses because the cross beam connections had fatigued.)

I personally would suggest if you want a 'high latitude cruising cat' that you just simply give up the speed/performance/lightweight aspirations. Those are likely to get you into trouble structurally, load carrying and knockdown resistance. I would focus on maximizing and enjoying the deck saloon view of the wonders you will see, and the non-rolling large flat deck platform. We have a german friend who sailed a quite heavy wooden cat around the southern ocean quite successfully with that general attitude.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by frederic_b

As for Garcia, I can’t find the Aluminium grade used in their range. I take it Jimmy Cornell, who co-designed their initial exploration boat to NW passage grade had it as it should be.

For most of their boats, Garcia use 5083 aluminium for the hull skins, which is the best traditional marine grade. The stringers used are 6060. Personally, ideally I prefer the stringers to also be in 5083, as this has slightly better corrosion resistance than 6060, but this approch costs a little interior room (as 5083 cannot be extruded), is a little more expensive and is fractionally heavier. Our previous boat was constructed with six series stringers (6061) and this is a perfectly good and popular choice.

There are some possible variations to the 5083 skin. Sealium (5383) and Alustar (5059) are new grades of aluminium and have been used on some boatbuilding projects in the last 5 years or so. These aluminium grades are a fraction stronger than 5083 so enable some weight savings. A slight reduction in hull thickness (say from 6mm to 5mm) is incorporated into the design keeping the strength the same but reducing weight. Garcia have used these grades of aluminium on a small number of their models previously. There are advantages and drawbacks, but basically these are also excellent and a very sensible choice for a cat considering the desire to keep weight down as much as possible. I would be surprised if one of these materials has not been chosen by Garcia for the hull skin of the catamaran.

Most purpose built expedition monohulls are constructed like tanks. Hull weight especially at or below the waterline, where impact is likely to occur, is not a significant problem especially when the boat has been designed with this in mind. Monohulls can be overbuilt. This is not so sensible with a catamaran.

The hull construction details for the Garcia catamaran have not been published (as far as I am aware), but don’t be surprised if they are a little (and maybe a lot) lighter than similar monohulls, especially non centreboard designs. More care is likely to be needed in ice conditions, but this is obviously just speculation at this stage.

I would be very surprised if Garcia have not designed a very sensible compromise between the conflicting requirements of strength and weight. Their welding and overall aluminium construction is very good.

As for general comments on boat design selection, read Dockhead’s (edit: and Breaking Waves) excellent posts above. There are compromises with every boatbuilding choice. Make sure these compromises match up with your expectations.