Is there a catamaran of cruising size that can self right unaided?

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by lucdekeyser

The only larger twin hull boat that I know that is built to prevent capsize is the pacific proa like the 36 foot

with an anticapsize pod (and berth) on the lee hull as seen on this picture.

Very interesting design actually.. Some out the box thinking.

Thanks for posting that.

[mark_morwood]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

If you do your homework properly you will see that I am right. Get the values for all the mono's in the world v's cats. Then narrow down the cruising ranges to include places common to cats and mono's and then determine the number of losses via sinking compared to cats flipping. Then extrapolate the numbers of cats to that of mono's, determine like for like probability then come back and say sorry. - Or just answer the question as I asked and leave the biting for kids, lesser animals and insects.

I'd love to see that data. My impression from watching this over 25 years of cruising on monohulls and catamarans is the opposite to yours, i.e. I think there is higher probability of a cruising mono sinking than there is of a cruising cat flipping, but if you have data that says the opposite, please share. I've never managed to put together a reliable set of data on this. I'm always happy to be educated.

[med]

Quite a few reports of capized cruising cataramans in France with loss of life.

I think this was a Lagoon 400:-
Actualités Nautisme : l'actualité du nautisme au quotidien avec Figaro Nautisme

Une fillette française meurt après le naufrage du bateau de sa famille au large des Açores

Naufrage d'un catamaranfrançais : 2 morts, 2 disparus- 18 avril 2006 - L'Obs

The danger for a cruising catamaran is being caught with too much sail up.
Easy you say - keep an eye on weather forecasts, reef early and conservatively.

I have been caught with full sail up in a F8. Just 3 minutes earlier it was blue skies and F1. Weather forecast was for F2 to F3. I was in a heavy full keel monohull - so apart from losing some cushions, breaking yet another coffee press and getting several hundred liters of sea water on my nephews bunk (while he was sleeping in it), I was OK.

In many cruising catamarans full sail in F8 would be enough to either bring the mast down or to flip the boat.

[mark_morwood]

Originally Posted by lucdekeyser

The only larger twin hull boat that I know that is built to prevent capsize is the pacific proa like the 36 foot with an anticapsize pod (and berth) on the lee hull as seen on this picture.

Not sure this is really relevant to the OP's question. All multi-hulls are built to resist capsize, though some more so than others - through factors such as length, beam, bouancy of hulls or amas, rig size etc.

My understanding is that the anti-capsize pod on the Harry Proa is to make its asymmetric nature as resistant to capsize as a regular trimaran or catamaran - not something that necessarily makes it more resistant to capsize than other multi-hulls.

[thinwater]

As a 40-year cat sailor, I get the capsize thing. I've pitch poled small cats, pushed the envelope on my Stilleto 27 (didn't capsize but certainly aired out a hull a few times, mostly on purpose... but then I put it back down, because I know how to do that), and cruised my PDQ lots in all sorts of snotty weather. Is capsize possible in a large cat? It requires either monumental stupidity or force 11. That said....

A capsized cat makes great news. "The crew huddled in the upside down yacht for 6 days ...."

A mono hull that sank does not. "Fresh Breeze is now 3 weeks over due...."

My personal feeling is that a sailor that learned to sail on small boats is a safe sailor; he has been beaten and destroyed, like the Old Man and the Sea, at least once, and respects the sea. I'm safe on a cat because I know how fast things can get bad, and what it feels like just before that.

[mark_morwood]

Originally Posted by med

Quite a few reports of capized cruising cataramans in France with loss of life.

I think this was a Lagoon 400:-
Actualités Nautisme : l'actualité du nautisme au quotidien avec Figaro Nautisme

Une fillette française meurt après le naufrage du bateau de sa famille au large des Açores

Naufrage d'un catamaranfrançais : 2 morts, 2 disparus- 18 avril 2006 - L'Obs

I agree with your assessment of one of the risks for capsize, i.e. being caught over canvassed, but I think large waves are definitely another risk factor. I do not know which caused the recent tragic capsize of the Lagoon near the Azores.

It's fairly easy to come up with anecdotal data on either side of this argument. I could add a bunch more catamaran capsizes to your list, including a Catana in the south of France years ago, but I could equally point out that I think 4 mono-hulls were abandoned (I'm not sure how many sank) in the same area and time as the Lagoon that capsized near the Azores a couple of weeks ago.

One often quoted, but still anecdotal incident on the other side of the equation, was the Queens Birthday storm between NZ and Fiji many years ago, where a large fleet of cruising boats got hit by a "cyclonic bomb". Some loss of life and boats amongst the mono-hulls, but none amongst the catamarans, including some to my mind very inexperienced catamaran crews.

But please note this is all anecdotal, I'd love to see the real data that PaulAnthony implied he had.

Mark.

[med]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Is capsize possible in a large cat? It requires either monumental stupidity or force 11.

We had F11 - F12 in the Med this week.

I have had 183km/h in my marina in the South of France a few years back.

In both cases I was glad to be at home in my solid steel reinforced concrete house.

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by mark_morwood

I'd love to see that data. My impression from watching this over 25 years of cruising on monohulls and catamarans is the opposite to yours, i.e. I think there is higher probability of a cruising mono sinking than there is of a cruising cat flipping, but if you have data that says the opposite, please share. I've never managed to put together a reliable set of data on this. I'm always happy to be educated.

Mark - I can't understand how you can think the probability can be the same. if you agree to this logic that it can not be the same then one has to have a higher instance of termination probability than the other when knocked with a wave.

Do you believe it is the catamaran?

Insurance companies do not think it is the catamaran and impose premiums if you want to go off piste because the weather presents greater risk for terminal capsize.

In a heavy lagoon in normal latitudes the risk is minimal and may even be less however if you run the probability with consideration of all uses, all cats, all sea states and weathers stratified against mono's pound for pound then insurers run a probability prediction curve that favours mono's at the edges.

It is not prejudicial thing its just physics. Mono's have a path to recovery and cats don't - I like cats and would to have a fast one if my sailing skills were any good which they are not which is why I posed the Q about self righting advances. I don't hate cats.

[smj]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

If you do your homework properly you will see that I am right. Get the values for all the mono's in the world v's cats. Then narrow down the cruising ranges to include places common to cats and mono's and then determine the number of losses via sinking compared to cats flipping. Then extrapolate the numbers of cats to that of mono's, determine like for like probability then come back and say sorry. - Or just answer the question as I asked and leave the biting for kids, lesser animals and insects.

You are absolutely incorrect. Insurance companies consider catamarans and monohulls as equal risks, though the risk of getting injured on a monohull is I believe 8 times greater. I to would like to see your research and numbers.

[mstrebe]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

If it is a submarine there is.

Quite true. Now the mission moves to finding a sailing submarine...

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by smj

You are absolutely incorrect. Insurance companies consider catamarans and monohulls as equal risks, though the risk of getting injured on a monohull is I believe 8 times greater. I to would like to see your research and numbers.

You are completely wrong. Go and get a quote to sail to the artic in a 40 foot cat and a quote for the same journey in a mono. For the same values from the same company.

[smj]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

You are completely wrong. Go and get a quote to sail to the artic in a 40 foot cat and a quote for the same journey in a mono. For the same values from the same company.

It would depend on which mono and which multi. Where's all your famous research?
http://forum.ssca.org/viewtopic.php?...869&hilit=NTSB

[lucdekeyser]

Originally Posted by paulanthony

Very interesting design actually.. Some out the box thinking.

so where catamarans a half century ago ...

[Grateful]

Originally Posted by lucdekeyser

so where catamarans a half century ago ...

Half a century ago? Try a century and a half ago!

Check out Amaryllis in 1875.

Catamaran? Check
Prodder? Check
Central Pod? Check
Fastest thing on the water? Check.

This boat incorporated most of the aspects of today's modern ultra high performance cat 140 years ago!

[paulanthony]

Originally Posted by smj

It would depend on which mono and which multi. Where's all your famous research?
SSCA Forum • View topic - Trimaran capsizes off New Zealand! Multi-hull or Mono-hull?

Racing cats and mono's have the same under writing risk curve. Cruisers do not. I have given you a determining body and if you do not believe me then give Lloyds a call or speak to a physics and maths teacher to determine your own probability curve.

Quite frankly I am not concerned what you believe as it is not poignant to my question.

You are quite free to reference some famous research yourself. Preferably though not from catamaran weekly.

You are not as secure like for like on the marginals. If you think you are then fine.

Mind boggles.