Multihull Disaster Story from Med

[mikereed100]

Originally Posted by Palarran

Any guesses on how the boat actually flipped? Have any of you heard of any other cruising cat that has flipped? The only one I've read about is the Leopard off the coast of Washington or Oregon. There where no survivors with that one.

We can only offer conjecture as the only witness was below at the time. I agree with Joli that a 30' wave should not capsize a 45' cat, however it would not be unheard of that a much larger wave coming from a different direction, in other words a "rogue wave", might have caused the capsize. The boat would already have been laying at some angle to the wind as they were unable to deploy the bridle to both bows and this could have contributed. Another possibility is that one or both of the bridle arms parted, allowing the boat to rest beam to the seas.

Mike

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by mikereed100

I agree with Joli that a 30' wave should not capsize a 45' cat (...)

And I do not. I think a 9 meter wave would, if it were breaking. And maybe a smaller one would too - if the boat surfs down the slope and buries in.

b.

[Eleven]

There was a considerable wind blowing, just maybe this got under the boat/bows off a sharp crest, the considerable plan area then just might have lifted the whole boat, landing with some considerable speed and not necessarily flat. This might also explain other unexpected capsizes in the broad beam cats. The modern cats have a very big plan, thes current aim to lower weight needs to be carefully considered with some modelling of rough and windy conditions before the insurance figures start to stack up and give the mono's even more ammunition against the Cat's.
It is also likely that the conditions met would have rolled a mono, potentially with loss of life, loss of boat and all lives etc. Those conditions were not very pleasant, but the Queens Birthday storm showed hat Cats survive, it's the crew that are the weak point.
This may also be why stern warps are better than bow warps!!!???

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by Eleven

This may also be why stern warps are better than bow warps!!!???

Yes. But warps are not a parachute anchor. Drogues are not parachute anchors either. But lets not get into that argument here.

[Eleven]

I was interested whether you experienced people had a view on drag deployed from the front or back. Most of the stuff I've read suggests dragging whatever to control boat speed. I was concerned that deploying from the bows might allow the wind to get under the bridge deck, more likely than a stern to the waves scenario.

[barnakiel]

Originally Posted by Eleven

(...) I was concerned that deploying from the bows might allow the wind to get under the bridge deck, more likely than a stern to the waves scenario.

Yep. But the bows are built to take the waves. You must have seen the door leading, on most cats, from the cockpit to the bridgedeck ....

The only cat I have see flipped upside down by the wind under the bridgedeck was the one anchored in the Carib during a cyclone. It had good anchor though ... ;-)))

b.

[Eleven]

Of course there is a trade off, but that it has happened gives credence to my theory. While running with brakes down wind the boat still wants to surf downhill, reducing the period and sharpness of the swell, but still presenting the heavy end to the wind BUT at the risk of being swamped by a breaker. Seamanship and design should handle that on a cat (Query see through doors). Bows on, as the bows are high and the wave falls away there is ample opportunity for the wind to lift the bows higher. I remember that each increase in f is a square of the wind pressure on a surface. I think I'll stick to running before with the option of 'sailing' under bare poles through a 90 degree option of course.
I've seen suggestions too the laying a cat broadside on is also a safe orientation, the boat rolling over each crest with out exposing it's belly to the wind. Interesting too that the US (and others) recommend multiple anchors to lock the boat in position, and therefore holding it down. It seems natural to put the bows and sloping windows into the wind, but these modern broad beam cats may have a weakness lying like that.
Comments please!

[oscar]

The bottom of the boat is white, impossible to spot in all the white foam. But the life jacket is orange. “You’re just so lucky,” the spotter says.

Although not intended for crossings, the floats and bottom of center hull on my try are being painted "safety red" which is close to orange for this very reason..... There are now anti fouling paints available in these party colors.

[homepage]

as mentioned in the beginning of this thread. I think the parachute contributed /caused the capsize. the attachment described would have exposed one bow to the weather while tethering the other down this would have acted like a pivot thereby actually assisting a capsize.the message for me would be if the attachment is not correct ie to both bows it would be safer to cut the parachute off .

[schoonerdog]

I think 10 years ago now I spoke to the maker of parachute anchors, and he mentioned this incident (I hadn't heard of it then), and how you never, never attach a parachute anchor that way. Only off the bows.

[JustThinking]

Ah! First of all: Great! I was looking for addtl. ref on this incident when I first read about it a few hours ago - am proud to now be a member of a community that (of course!) also does/did cover that issue!

I still wonder thou what time of your that Catana 48 flip happend? Fall I would guess - since that's the time of year we (a) do get frequently hit with weather like that (me: Mallorca/Balearics) ... (b) year after year everybody seems to be surprised and (c ) since they were planning to go to the Caribbean it would make sense they left in early fall.
Anyone know any particulars?

Originally Posted by mark_morwood

.....which has the same sub-optimal escape hatch arrangement as on the boat in this story, i.e. in the floor of the bridgedeck.

Taken from all the stories I wonder if an (additional?!) escape-hatch at that location really is such a bad idea!
Seems that the air trapped in the hulls (a) gives great addtl. buoyancy which is reported to be lost when people actually pop these hatches and (b) the center of the bridge-deck is conveniently located to all parts of the boat you might want/need to reach even once outside - o.k., you'd have to dive to get to/from but by that time you'd be soaked already anyway and on an average cut it wont be more than say 6-9 feet in either direction until you surface in the well buoyant hulls with air in them...

hmm,... just thinking....

[Ozbullwinkle]

Originally Posted by spiritcat

I have painted the whole underside of the bridgedeck with Rescue Orange non skid paint and installed a webbing strap on each side from one end to the other. The escape hatches can be opened from inside or out, provided they have been unlocked, which a priority before sailing.
If the situation arose that we capsized, I want to be seen and crew secure.

Painting the underside of the bridgedeck with Rescue Orange is a very sensible thing to do together with installing the dual webbing straps. The webbing straps would also provide an additional safety feature should a crewmember ever fall off the bow or go through the trampolines while underway. The webbing straps would provide you with a chance of something to grab onto as you went through the tunnel.

[Palarran]

I think there's about zero chance of snagging a line strapped to the underside of your bridgedeck while sailing, whether by accident or on purpose.

[Ozbullwinkle]

Originally Posted by Palarran

I think there's about zero chance of snagging a line strapped to the underside of your bridgedeck while sailing, whether by accident or on purpose.

I do not agree that there would be zero chance of grabbing them. It would of course depend on a number of factors like the conditions at the time,the way that you fell into the water, the speed that you were travelling and the bridgedeck height of the vessel etc and a bit of luck. As you would be able to reach up to the underside of the bridgedeck you would have a chance of grabbing them. I would like to have that chance wouldn't you or would you like to emerge from the back of the tunnel and think I wonder if I may have been able to grab onto some webbing staps if they had been there?

The only thing that you could be certain of is that if these webbing straps were not under the bridgedeck then that is the only time that you would have zero chance of grabbing them.

[Therapy]

Originally Posted by Ozbullwinkle

I do not agree that there would be zero chance of grabbing them. It would of course depend on a number of factors like the conditions at the time,the way that you fell into the water, the speed that you were travelling and the bridgedeck height of the vessel etc and a bit of luck. As you would be able to reach up to the underside of the bridgedeck you would have a chance of grabbing them. I would like to have that chance wouldn't you or would you like to emerge from the back of the tunnel and think I wonder if I may have been able to grab onto some webbing staps if they had been there?

The only thing that you could be certain of is that if these webbing straps were not under the bridgedeck then that is the only time that you would have zero chance of grabbing them.

Even if you could grab onto one the idea of being able to hold on for more than a few seconds is a fantasy. Boat speed is a consideration but.........then what are you going to do?