The Reason People Are Moving Away From Monohulls

[weavis]

Originally Posted by daletournier

Cats have proven themselves without a doubt, and I believe most of us out there know this and have no issue, why would we?

Most of us? I think the Cf mail box and commentary is more representative of the reality of the general feeling towards catamarans.

I accept some cat owners are extremely defensive in regard to answering critiques........ and there is need for more restraint...unfortunately denigration of the marque is alive and well.

I can only hope the more enlightened sailors among us will spread the live and let live attitude...

[Jim Cate]

For those who believe that cats pitchpole, google the "quens birthday race storm 1994". Many monos with experienced skippers have been almost all of them knockdowned several times, the crew seriously wounded, all of them dismasted and one them was lost with 3 crews onboard. Two cruising cats (a Catalac 10 m and one off 43 ft cat, not necessarily offshore capable boats) were cought in the same area with elderly couples on board. Guess what; they didn't pitchpoled even though they came close to several times. They just sat in the saloon and waited, one of them with the main blown out...

While there is a lesson to be learned from that storm, this representation is a bit skewed. All of the monos dismasted??? Are you serious? Most of the boats survived and reached their destinations. Some were abandoned, including both cats that you mention. Ramtha was later recovered, the Catalac was deliberately destroyed at the insistence of her fruitcake owners. Both cats with "elderly" crews? Wrong again, or you have an unusual definition of elderly.

Many of the monohulls were indeed knocked down. Most recovered. Destiny, a Norseman 47 IIRC may have pitchpoled, or perhaps a sort of 3/4 pitch and roll movement, and was dismasted in the process and the skipper badly injured. They were later rescued and the boat washed up on an island long later. No one knows what happened to Quartermaster, the Lidgard 40 that was lost with all hands.

It was a pretty awful storm, and no one who went through it would care to repeat the experience. The crews on the two cats may indeed have been more comfortable than those on monohulls, but our conversations with the crew of Ramtha later didn't seem to indicate that they found it all that nice! And the crew of Heart of Gold, a 50 foot monohull were the most comfortable of all: they piled on sail and outran the storm, arriving safely in Tonga without damage or distress.

I'm not knowledgeable enough to say whether cats are ultimately more seaworthy than monohulls, but the evidence of the Queen's Birthday storm surely do not prove that concept.

Jim

[GTom]

Originally Posted by yeloya

For those who believe that cats pitchpole, google the "quens birthday race storm 1994". Many monos with experienced skippers have been almost all of them knockdowned several times, the crew seriously wounded, all of them dismasted and one them was lost with 3 crews onboard. Two cruising cats (a Catalac 10 m and one off 43 ft cat, not necessarily offshore capable boats) were cought in the same area with elderly couples on board. Guess what; they didn't pitchpoled even though they came close to several times. They just sat in the saloon and waited, one of them with the main blown out...

Out of the 8 lost boats, 2 were cats. I couldn't find a full entry list if this 25% is an over or under-representation.

[PaulinOz]

Quote "I accept some cat owners are extremely defensive in regard to answering critiques........"

Nanhhhh, you think, If we do not have the mono fraternity throwing disparaging remarks about our chosen style of vessel for more than 5 minutes, we will just as easily turn on each other for an even more heated argument.

Much the same way the mono fraternity will start deriding the production Beneteaus if no, two on one hull action over here.

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

I'm not knowledgeable enough to say whether cats are ultimately more seaworthy than monohulls, but the evidence of the Queen's Birthday storm surely do not prove that concept.

Jim

But is anyone claiming cat's are MORE seaworthy? Usually all we're doing is countering the oft stated "fact" that as soon as the wind pipes up, all cat's will immediately flip, in conditions "any decent mono'" would find a minor inconvenience.

The Queen's Birthday storm DOES prove that falseness of that.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by weavis

Most of us? I think the Cf mail box and commentary is more representative of the reality of the general feeling towards catamarans.

I accept some cat owners are extremely defensive in regard to answering critiques........ and there is need for more restraint...unfortunately denigration of the marque is alive and well.

I can only hope the more enlightened sailors among us will spread the live and let live attitude...

I disagree Weavis, we must read the forum differently. Yes there are some uneducated cat haters but I really don't see that many relative to the large amounts of postings. Also keep in mind a extremely large number of experienced cruisers don't contribute to cf, to say its indicative of the general feeling is a stretch imho.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[smj]

Originally Posted by PaulinOz

Post #247

This was written by an ex CF moderator.
https://www.ssca.org/forum/viewtopic...283be58#p33869

Worth a copy and paste me thinks, but I am positive others will disagree.


Before I retired from the NTSB I had the oportunity to study the complete Coast Guard database of boating accidents and Summary
Data of proprietary actuarial information from sources within the Lloyds' Groups, with a focus on vessels with accomodations including permanent berths, head(s) and galley. I tried to exclude beach cats and tris, and daysailers by excluding boats under 24 feet. The data was not user-friendly and required a lot of external correlation because many vessels were incorrectly classified. That ultimately prevented releasing any conclusions because GI+MGI=GO (garbage in plus more garbage in still equals garbage out.) This was also a problem with the older NTSB databases that included pre-digital-age reporting. However, I discovered in the process that there were few differences between monohul and multihull rates of occurrence. That's easy to understand; human error trumps mechanical failure and design deficiency evermore. Here are some of the facts that did become apparent: Vessels designed for racing and record attempts break. Vessels built for cruising don't break. People who race drive themselves and their vessels to the limit. [please forgive the pun] Cruisers drive their homes to the next nice place.
The rates of actual vessel loss (outside of competition) remained the same for monohulls and multihulls, over many years, with catamarans emerging slightly ahead of other vessels in the last years of available data. Reports of large numbers of catamaran roll-overs are probably anecdotal as accident statistics reveal a (slight) decline, with a slight increase in sinkings among monohulls. There was a lot of confusion in the data between catamarans and trimarans, which I can only suggest an interpretation for:

Vessels purpose built for competition are not recorded as such. Each accident had to be researched individually. Many were not insured, meaning that Insurance data would not take them into account. In fact, Many sinkings of monohulls were extremely difficult to document because they were never widely reported. This is changing as news media is becoming more interested, especially in colorful visuals.

A very small percentage of trimarans are sold for cruising, as a very small percentage of catamarans are sold for racing. The best correlation between racing and competition vessels was a ratio of lwl to mast height.

Where I was able to distinguish between cruising and competition vessels, I found that the rate of personal injuries and single fatalities was higher among monohulls. That should merit further study because those injuries appeared to occur in better weather conditions, not in worse. These accidents included cabin injuries, man-overboards, and deck injuries such as inadvertant jibes.

My conclusions were impaired by the quality of data, and my proposal of a National Transportation Safety Board Special Study was properly overshadowed by more important issues. But there is enough factual data to prove that cruising multihulls are no more, and possible less dangerous than cruising monohulls in all reported conditions of weather, traffic, and human frailty, regardless of location.

You won't find many replies to this as it represents facts and not feelings.

[buzzstar]

Originally Posted by PaulinOz

Post #247

This was written by an ex CF moderator.
https://www.ssca.org/forum/viewtopic...283be58#p33869

Worth a copy and paste me thinks, but I am positive others will disagree.


Before I retired from the NTSB I had the oportunity to study the complete Coast Guard database of boating accidents and Summary
Data of proprietary actuarial information from sources within the Lloyds' Groups, with a focus on vessels with accomodations including permanent berths, head(s) and galley. I tried to exclude beach cats and tris, and daysailers by excluding boats under 24 feet. The data was not user-friendly and required a lot of external correlation because many vessels were incorrectly classified. That ultimately prevented releasing any conclusions because GI+MGI=GO (garbage in plus more garbage in still equals garbage out.) This was also a problem with the older NTSB databases that included pre-digital-age reporting. However, I discovered in the process that there were few differences between monohul and multihull rates of occurrence. That's easy to understand; human error trumps mechanical failure and design deficiency evermore. Here are some of the facts that did become apparent: Vessels designed for racing and record attempts break. Vessels built for cruising don't break. People who race drive themselves and their vessels to the limit. [please forgive the pun] Cruisers drive their homes to the next nice place.
The rates of actual vessel loss (outside of competition) remained the same for monohulls and multihulls, over many years, with catamarans emerging slightly ahead of other vessels in the last years of available data. Reports of large numbers of catamaran roll-overs are probably anecdotal as accident statistics reveal a (slight) decline, with a slight increase in sinkings among monohulls. There was a lot of confusion in the data between catamarans and trimarans, which I can only suggest an interpretation for:

Vessels purpose built for competition are not recorded as such. Each accident had to be researched individually. Many were not insured, meaning that Insurance data would not take them into account. In fact, Many sinkings of monohulls were extremely difficult to document because they were never widely reported. This is changing as news media is becoming more interested, especially in colorful visuals.

A very small percentage of trimarans are sold for cruising, as a very small percentage of catamarans are sold for racing. The best correlation between racing and competition vessels was a ratio of lwl to mast height.

Where I was able to distinguish between cruising and competition vessels, I found that the rate of personal injuries and single fatalities was higher among monohulls. That should merit further study because those injuries appeared to occur in better weather conditions, not in worse. These accidents included cabin injuries, man-overboards, and deck injuries such as inadvertant jibes.

My conclusions were impaired by the quality of data, and my proposal of a National Transportation Safety Board Special Study was properly overshadowed by more important issues. But there is enough factual data to prove that cruising multihulls are no more, and possible less dangerous than cruising monohulls in all reported conditions of weather, traffic, and human frailty, regardless of location.

Sounds to me like another study that could be categorized as a precursor to an eventual nanny state proposal. If air bags on automobiles are good (and I agree they are) we probably need padded booms on sailing vessels.... OMG

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by daletournier

I think the cat prejudice thing is over rated. Most of us out here, well most I know like cats and have zero issue with them, yer there are some critics but they are few and far between.

Still we do encounter them. We've had people tell us "you can't cross an ocean in a catamaran".

Just recently, tied to a public dock in Lake Macquarie, a guy walked up and said, apropos of nothing, "I wouldn't want to take that thing out to sea."!

He then went on to denigrate just about everything on our boat, from the outboard motors to the colour of the paint! He even suggested we were too wide to get through the Swansea bridge! (How did we get in?)

We pretty much just ignored him, taking water, getting rid of garbage etc, until he started trying to physically get in our way, shoving his ignorance in our faces. At which point I advised him to leave.

Funny thing is, I can actually imagine some members of this forum acting like this.

[daletournier]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

But is anyone claiming cat's are MORE seaworthy? Usually all we're doing is countering the oft stated "fact" that as soon as the wind pipes up, all cat's will immediately flip, in conditions "any decent mono'" would find a minor inconvenience.

The Queen's Birthday storm DOES prove that falseness of that.

I would say some cats are more seaworthy than monos if sailed correctly, ie daggerboards vs keels amongst other things , less to trip over. And some monos are more seaworthy than some cats if sailed correctly.

The problem is there are lots of different cats and lots of different monos and all priced differently, broadly comparing is ridiculous.

I'd say a well built wharram is extremely seaworthy but I question whether a huge rigged , low bridge deck ,fat assed transom cat is?

This is why these discussions go nowhere.

Someone made a comment regarding living area in a cat being nicer, well that depends if your talking about a 30 year old mono cave ,well then yes imho, but compared to the airy,light and very large living area of my Catalina 470 I'd say no......my point once again is theres a large range of monos and cats.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[robert sailor]

Originally Posted by Cotemar

The proof in Catamarans seaworthiness is in the FACT that 1000's of multi-hulls have crossed oceans to be delivered on their own bottoms and then go on the Circumnavigate the WORLD.
.
.

You may be overstating although I don't have the support numbers, maybe you do. While many Cats have been delivered on their own bottoms these days I believe most are shipped. As to those thousands that went on to circumnavigate, now this number I don't believe and I may not even believe the support numbers

[smj]

Originally Posted by daletournier

I would say some cats are more seaworthy than monos if sailed correctly, ie daggerboards vs keels amongst other things , less to trip over. And some monos are more seaworthy than some cats if sailed correctly.

The problem is there are lots of different cats and lots of different monos and all priced differently, broadly comparing is ridiculous.

I'd say a well built wharram is extremely seaworthy but I question whether a huge rigged , low bridge deck ,fat assed transom cat is?

This is why these discussions go nowhere.

Someone made a comment regarding living area in a cat being nicer, well that depends if your talking about a 30 year old mono cave ,well then yes imho, but compared to the airy,light and very large living area of my Catalina 470 I'd say no......my point once again is theres a large range of monos and cats.

Sent from my vivo Y35 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

Do you consider your Catalina 470 seaworthy?

[rallyman1122]

Originally Posted by weavis

I think I will have to stand by my comment.

Prejudice comes in prejudgement. Prejudged is the infered belief that monohulls are infinitely safe and everything has to be measured against them. Given this 'feeling', then any multihull will have to be proven better than to have a chance of measuring up.

This is almost a supertitious and fearful approach which negates an honest appraisal.

Example:

I think about capsizing in bad weather on ANY vessel Im on, I dont differentiate.



But you havent with catamarans have you?

The bottom line is that if a mono goes over in bad weather and doesnt right itself, the keel is not designed to do that.... then heads will be bobbing in the water and the boat will sink.

If a Cat goes over, then it will probably be floating in the water and crew will find appropriate places to hold on too.

This is not an ideal situation for either vessel or personnel. TO be honest it sucks. The difference is negligible except in choice of vessel to be on when setting off. Fortunately for us sailors, Its a rare event. But in the event, there is hope for the crew either way.

The idea is to try not to be in overwhelming sea conditions in either type of vessel, and to know your boat and how to minimise a problem.

I dont mind either in a blow.... as long as its a good example of the single or double hull.... But I will not denigrate a multi due to prejudice... for that is what it is...

I disagree with your point of view but respect the way you have defended that point of view. On this one we will have to agree to disagree. Without malice, just differing opinions. Kinda like cat vs monos. At least people are on the water.

[boatman61]

Just take it with a pinch of salt..
I had folk tell me if I tried taking my Bene 321 and then a few years later my Chrubini 37c.. across the Atlantic solo it was certain death..
Later I've had folk saying taking a Lagoon 440 across from Ft Lauderdale to Spain in Febuary with just 1 crew was crazy.. and then soloing a HT 26 from Santander to the UK across the Biscay in September was suicidal..
Folk judge from personal opinions. abilities, hearsay and risk tolerances.. its the nature of the beast..

[buzzstar]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

Still we do encounter them. We've had people tell us "you can't cross an ocean in a catamaran".

Just recently, tied to a public dock in Lake Macquarie, a guy walked up and said, apropos of nothing, "I wouldn't want to take that thing out to sea."!

He then went on to denigrate just about everything on our boat, from the outboard motors to the colour of the paint! He even suggested we were too wide to get through the Swansea bridge! (How did we get in?)

We pretty much just ignored him, taking water, getting rid of garbage etc, until he started trying to physically get in our way, shoving his ignorance in our faces. At which point I advised him to leave.

Funny thing is, I can actually imagine some members of this forum acting like this.

We, in the United States, have recently learned about what you describe. As a negotiating technique. Might work for some, in some situations.

I can say, while in general I would prefer to cross an ocean in a mono, the specifics become important, and there are definitely some cats I'd prefer to some monos. BTW, I've been told, thankfully in private, that there are some that would prefer to cross that ocean alone on a surfboard, than with me on either a mono or a cat. Do you think they are kidding? I do not. Fortunately, there are some who say they'd prefer to accompany me on a mono than a cat, and I know of no one, thus far, who would prefer to accompany me on a cat rather than a mono. What a responsibility! [Those of you who want to suggest I do the surfboard crossing alone can (remainder of comment reviewed and deleted by spouse).]