Another Broken Lagoon

[cherod]

I re-state my belief that (nearly) all catamarans are unsafe. I say nearly because there could be one somewhere that ticks all the boxes. Perhaps I should explain why I sold my Prout catamaran to buy a monohull and never to consider one again. Eric Hiscock in one of his cruising books recomends that a skipper should chisel his personal mantra on the main bulkhead. I forget what his was but mine was a Chinese Proverb. "The Tiger Leaps Once".

In a monohull, a skipper can pile on the canvas with whoops of joy and the spirit of adventure. When the boat gets overwhelmed he is warned and he can back off. Not so with a Catamaran which are deliberately under-rigged anyway, but even so a point can suddenly arrive when over she goes. For ever. No time to back off.

This almost happened to me when I cleared the shelter of Monserrat under full sail and got hit with the trades. I lifted a hull in the air. I instinctively turned into the wind as one does. Fortunitely my wife screamed at me "The other way, the other way" I reacted and turned the other way so the airborn hull came crashing down. I was really shaken. The Tiger does miss sometimes but not often. I got rid of the catamaran in Miami ASAP. The nearest land to to leeward would have been 1300 miles to Costa Rica. No thanks.

Recall that Snowgoose under bare poles that was capsized in Vlicho bay.

So, geem, can you tell us why you sold your Snowgoose after a successful Transat. Or anybody eelse perhaps who changed to monohull. I am not interested in those who changed from monohull to catamaran. Chasing a "will o the wisp" no doubt. Human nature.

Hard to believe , someone clears a headland and is hit by stronger winds then blames the boat ,,, are you being serious ?

 

[WGWarburton]

I wonder how much flack I'm about to endure by admitting that I have my eye on an ancient Lagoon 440?

Probably depends what you're planning to do with it... I imagine it would be a far more comfortable marina liveaboard than most.... if you're planning to use it as a chase boat to take photos on the next Vendee Arctique then I suspect some might pitch in with some constructive advice.

 

[cherod]

I live on the same planet as you do and I do not base my opinion on ONE old Catamaran, i base it in 5 years of Ocean sailing in a Prout catamaran and living the life surrounded by other catamaran owners as we congregate together in various anchorages. I consider the capsize of a catamaran in Vlicho bay while under bare poles as proof that a catamaran can and do capsize by a force of nature. Pure weather, no collision, no mistake in handling, just sitting there with the crew below decks. The monohulls that "sank" ran aground after dragging. In those circumstances in the Ocean the monohulls would have survived but the Snowgoose would have capsized.

Or would it? I am pretty sure how and why it happened so I will fess up. I did not see it happen. The wind was cyclonic? The wind blew from one direction initially. This put the Snowgoose at the limit of the anchor chain. Probably 30 meters. Then the wind switched suddenly 180 degrees. The Snowgoose surged forward accelerating for 60 meters until it overan its anchor with the chain taught between the hulls. This brought the boat to a sudden stop and dipped her bow which raised the stern. The high following wind got under the bridge deck and assisted the tripping momentum which took her over.

It is a mistake to glibly pass over this incident because it does not fit your narrative. For me, because I sailed a similar cat it reinforced my belief with proof that catamarans are unsafe. I have no proof just a guess from my own experience that windage under the bridge deck can also contribute to a capsize. Geem says that in 50 knot winds his snowgoose slid sideways. I agree it also happened to me. The ability to slide sideways due to low draft 80cm with no dagger board is well known. There may be sufficient force on the sails to tip the cat over but with no grip on the sea the cat will just skate away. With the wind astern exposing the bridge deck the cat is in pitch pole territory.

I have not changed my mind. IMO IMO IMO (get it?) all catamarans are intrinsically unsafe simply because they are basically unballasted rafts. They do turn over, however the larger and heavier they are the safer they become. I reckon 50 to 60 foot is approaching the low risk of a monohull.

Finally, your jibe against old war horses in the Golden Globe is sneaky. That was a single handed race in the Southern Ocean. I wander how a lagoon would handle the Southern Ocean when they get to 40 years old.

Intetesting that you continually mention Prouts and Lagoons , 2 of the ugliest and
most underperforming cats available , ( despite this both have completed multiple passages and circum navs )

 

[cherod]

I wonder how much flack I'm about to endure by admitting that I have my eye on an ancient Lagoon 440?

I dont believe you ??

 

[westernman]

Hard to believe , someone clears a headland and is hit by stronger winds then blames the boat ,,, are you being serious ?

You don't need to move or clear a headland to suddenly get hit by stronger winds.
In the past I have been drifting in very light winds off the coast of Spain with full sail up for the wind to go from Bf 1 to Bf 7 inside the space of 10 minutes.

Some catamarans with full sail up including a code 0 or full sized spinnaker may well have got into difficulties in exactly those circumstances (with my FX-one I would have ended up in the drink, but I did go swimming on a regular basis back when I had that).

 

[cherod]

You don't need to move or clear a headland to suddenly get hit by stronger winds.
In the past I have been drifting in very light winds off the coast of Spain with full sail up for the wind to go from Bf 1 to Bf 7 inside the space of 10 minutes.

Some catamarans with full sail up including a code 0 or full sized spinnaker may well have got into difficulties in exactly those circumstances (with my FX-one I would have ended up in the drink, but I did go swimming on a regular basis back when I had that).

No of course not , but clearing any headland can potentially change the conditions and then to blame the boat , really ?

 

[Stingo]

Probably depends what you're planning to do with it... I imagine it would be a far more comfortable marina liveaboard than most.... if you're planning to use it as a chase boat to take photos on the next Vendee Arctique then I suspect some might pitch in with some constructive advice.

The plan is to head back to the Caribbean as a permanent liveaboard, changing anchorages regularly, avoiding marinas and those annoying septic radio nets.

 

[BurnitBlue]

But they still flexed like crazy. They were plain glass construction in the hull and balsa cored decks. The hulls were not rigid. If Prout had built the hulls from core they would have been far, far stiffer. Ours had a continual problem of leaking front windows because of the hull flex. I had to add a longitudinal stringer in the heads due to the hull pumping.
I liked the Prout but not the low bridge deck clearance or the solid bridge deck. They were early on in the evolution of catamarans. On the whole, Prout did a good job but they were far from perfect

My Prout definitely was rigid with absolutely no indication of flexing or creaking. Mine was the Quest 31. The first after the boat show model which I ordered that very day. My Prout was perfect because I built the interior myself in Holland with world class Dutch bronzeel(sp) ply on a very rigid shell.. I bought the the hull and deck plus the main bulkhead sailed her to Holland with no engine and proceeded from there. She was perfect in every way except the threat of overturning came to head after five years sailing her.

Pity about your Prout but mine was perfect structurally. PS i saw an advert for her sale in Florida a few years ago for 30,000 dollars. I paid 2,500 pounds for my shell.

 

[capnsensible]

Intetesting that you continually mention Prouts and Lagoons , 2 of the ugliest and
most underperforming cats available ,

Subjective.

 

[BurnitBlue]

BTW, i am not knocking flexability as a bad thing because some cats have it built in. Someone mentioned the Wharram cats. If my memory is correct the cross beams connecting the two hulls were not bolted down. The beams were laid on rubber and were tied down with ropes. Some DIY builders modified this and used bolts and they were probably OK. James Wharram would say that each hull is in a different sea and should be flexible enough the allow each hull to settle to there indivudual marks at any instant. I could be wrong about the ropes. Wharram could have invented a secure but flexible joint.

 

[Chiara’s slave]

Subjective.

Ugly is subjective, even though I agree. Underperforming isnt subjective. Prouts are pretty ancient, and can be excused for being first. Lagoons are just a bit rubbish, sailing wise.

 

[geem]

The Prout

My Prout definitely was rigid with absolutely no indication of flexing or creaking. Mine was the Quest 31. The first after the boat show model which I ordered that very day. My Prout was perfect because I built the interior myself in Holland with world class Dutch bronzeel(sp) ply on a very rigid shell.. I bought the the hull and deck plus the main bulkhead sailed her to Holland with no engine and proceeded from there. She was perfect in every way except the threat of overturning came to head after five years sailing her.

Pity about your Prout but mine was perfect structurally. PS i saw an advert for her sale in Florida a few years ago for 30,000 dollars. I paid 2,500 pounds for my shell.

The Prout 31 Quest was a fairly poor performing catamaran. Their ability to go to windward with their blunt bows was not great. I know this having sailed in company with a friends 31. She made a very poor tacking angle.
Being smaller than a Snowgoose 37 there panel sizes were smaller so they were probably less flexible. However, a cored construction using the same overall thickness of glass would be 37 times stiffer than solid GRP.
Did you sail her across the Atlantic? I can't image what that would be like. Very hard to carry enough provisions without grossly overloading it.
There was no structural issue with my Prout. No cracks, no bulkhead issues but even though we kept it light she was not a stiff hull. Can you imagine how much she would stress the hull if she was heavily loaded. She would go through waves instead of over them. There would be more bridge deck slamming.

 

[Tranona]

I know the Moody 38 quite well. I think they are a poor choice for ocean cruising. Small centre cockpit boats rarely work well. The Moody has a very high cockpit. You sit on that boat rather than in it. We were along side a Moody 44 in Shelter Bay marina. Our cockpit seats were a foot lower than even the 44.
High hull volume boats are less comfortable than heavy lower volume hulls when the conditions get bouncy.
You need to take the comfort ratio with a pinch of salt. Even the guy who invented that formula does

Despite all that they are both very popular boats for the job and still desirable. And remember as you know more than anybody more time is spent not moving and of the moving time the vast majority is in benign conditions. All composite measures are poor if they do not confirm your position on the subject but they at least try to be objective and apply equally to all, so are a good comparison. Even though you dismiss it displacement and beam , the factors you claim are important feature very strongly in the calculation. So much better to consider a method that does attempt to quantify the characteristic than just saying his cockpit seats are a foot higher than mine implying that is a disaster - and it is a 38 we were talking about, not a 44 - although that is an equally desirable and popular ocean cruiser.

You have to accept that low freeboard deep keeled narrow low hull volume boats are in a minority for ocean cruising - indeed for sailing in general. Can all who choose otherwise be wrong?

 

[geem]

Ugly is subjective, even though I agree. Underperforming isnt subjective. Prouts are pretty ancient, and can be excused for being first. Lagoons are just a bit rubbish, sailing wise.

I had a race with an Admiral 38 cat and my friends 38 ft self build monohull. I was sailing our Prout. The night before the race my friend Phil, owner of the Admiral 38 said that the Prout was early on the evolution of cats. He was right of course, but that was fighting talk! The race was from Bequia to Union Island. We won easily. That evening Phil bought the beer. Phil had a boatyard in SA. He built the first two Gunboats there

 

[capnsensible]

Ugly is subjective, even though I agree. Underperforming isnt subjective. Prouts are pretty ancient, and can be excused for being first. Lagoons are just a bit rubbish, sailing wise.

It's down to the skill of the sailor. I didn't ever have a problem......

 

[capnsensible]

BTW, i am not knocking flexability as a bad thing because some cats have it built in. Someone mentioned the Wharram cats. If my memory is correct the cross beams connecting the two hulls were not bolted down. The beams were laid on rubber and were tied down with ropes. Some DIY builders modified this and used bolts and they were probably OK. James Wharram would say that each hull is in a different sea and should be flexible enough the allow each hull to settle to there indivudual marks at any instant. I could be wrong about the ropes. Wharram could have invented a secure but flexible joint.

They are indeed roped. Including the big ones.

 

[cherod]

Another broken Lagoon... a 410 this time

✂ Another Broken Lagoon

Does anybody else think the skinny shear web under variable compressive and tensile loads is a bad idea or is it just me?

arguments apart , much as i dont have much in common with Lagoon owners i am sorry to see it happen to those people , they have been throo a lot the last few years with the covantics etc , one of the more likeable channels

 

[cherod]

The plan is to head back to the Caribbean as a permanent liveaboard, changing anchorages regularly, avoiding marinas and those annoying septic radio nets.

I maybe entirely wrong , of the common mass produced compromise boats is the mid range Pajot not a decent boat , wont break the bank .

 

[Chiara’s slave]

It's down to the skill of the sailor. I didn't ever have a problem......

Of course. But an utter numpty on a modern Dazcat or something similar could beat your old Prout without even knowing there was a race. Times change, ideas mature. The brothers Prout were valiant pioneers, I salute them. However, Roland knew the limitations of his own designs, he owned a Dragonfly 800. I know this because I bought it from his estate. I now have a 920

 

[Supertramp]

This has been one of the best discussions to follow.

It really isn't about whose boat is best - it's about choosing wisely and then enjoying it. A good choice and you appreciate the design and build all the more. And that could a cat, a wooden classic or a modern design. Without all the different points of view we would all end up in the same boats....

What this is about is the disappointment of finding your boat is not all you thought it was. I am a novice compared to many of you but chose comfort and build quality over performance (Cromarty 36). As I delve around (replacing 30 Yr old bits) I am pleased to find good quality extends to hidden tabbing, joinery and accessibility of fittings. Watching the various you tubes of bulkhead failure and checking leaves me amazed at the lightweight and poorly finished materials. I can see why lightweight designs appeal but not when built like that. Even if you go faster than others.