Upside down trailer sailer.

[moondancer]

I was walking around Loch Lomond at the weekend and saw an upside down water ballasted American trailer sailer, tied up at the pontoon. I am not sure if anyone was hurt, or how the accident happened but is was sobering to see.


I have heard tales of these things capsizing before - but presumed extreme conditions etc.. but to happen in a sheltered lake on a day with little wind begs the question - are these vessels safe. Particularly when the people who buy them seem to be newcomers to sailing.



<hr width=100% size=1>

Title edited by Kim Hollamby<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1>Edited by kimhollamby on 31/07/2003 14:10 (server time).</FONT></P>

 

[graham]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

I have expressed my doubts as to the seaworthyness of these boats before.

Be carefull not to name the builders or the thread will be removed.

In capable hands no doubt they are OK but as you say they are marketed at boatshows ,with all the skill of a double glazing salesman,and the targeted audience is inevitably going to consist largely of the in experienced who think they are getting a lot of boat for their money.

If you use the search facility on trhis site you will find other threads on the subject.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Miquel_Culzean]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

I have one of those trailorable american sailers, and I'm quite happy with it. You must pay attention to some details which are quite important for stability; if you do so, there is no much problem (I've been out in the North Sea up to force 6, without any feeling of insecurity).

Another reason could be that the owners were just washing the inner part of the boat...you never know.

Fair winds,

Miquel
Culzean

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Stemar]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

Pure speculation of course, but I suspect trying to sail without the water ballast could be a very good way of getting one upside down in the first gust.

I've spoken to owners of M*******rs who are very happy with them and have no stability problems, but none of them thinks he has a blue water boat.

It's horses for courses. They like/need to take their boats home and accept the limitations that go with that. I prefer a bit of weight under me and accept that a change of sailing area will cost me quite of lot of time or money.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Miquel_Culzean]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

As in other things in life, every decission you take is a compromise. When buying my boat, at least it was the case.

Those boats are not made to cross the Atlantic, or to do serious crossing; I agree. This is why they are rated (or approved) as C in the CE marking system; this is to say, for coastal navigation (up to 6B, or waves of a significant heigth of 2m). If you take the Spanish and the French system, this means that you can go out to 25 nautical miles from the coast.

And of course, one of the major reasons for capsizing when sailing is not filling completely the water ballast, or not filling it at all. This happens with any boat with a water ballast system (M**** is not the only one in the market), and even with boats with "solid" ballast, if you "forget" to put it back fter working in your boat.

Fair winds,

Miquel
Culzean

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gunfleet]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

That'll be fine then, because we never get waves over 2metres around the British coast.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

I've tried hard, very hard. But. I don't understand your point? Lots of boats are CE category C and are fine in UK waters, and a long way beyond

<hr width=100% size=1>Err, let me know if Depsol enters the forum, I'll go and hide

 

[Gunfleet]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

It's not my point but Miguel's. Try harder

 

[BrendanS]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

Category C means the ability to cope with median waves of 2m. Which can mean 4m or more. I'm still trying hard. I'm not taking the piss. What is your point?

<hr width=100% size=1>Err, let me know if Depsol enters the forum, I'll go and hide

 

[vyv_cox]

Switch brain to \"irony\"

to understand John's point. As I understand him, he is making the point that no reasonable boating classification system can presume that wave height will never be above a certain value, whether 25, 2 or 0.5 miles from the coast.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gunfleet]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

Okay Brendan, I thought you were (ttp). I was being ironic, as Vyv points out. I think McWhatits should be confined to lakes. If the French and Spanish accept that there are no 2 metre waves within 25 miles of the Atlantic coast they need their heads tested, but as pointed out above in this thread, the real danger is some inexperieced type thinking a Mcwhatsit would be safe even tied to a pontoon (QED) and buying and sailing it on that basis. I expect your boat, like mine, will pop up again once inverted, which is a good safety feature in any kind of sea. That's why C&N put 2 tons of lead in the keel of my 26 ft boat. If they didn't need it they wouldn't have bothered. Legislation on this subject and and boat categories are a farce. But what happens if you don't know they're a farce?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Miquel_Culzean]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

It is true; average waves of 2 meters (the "C" in CE classification) means that you will find waes up to 4 meters. And you cannot predict if you will have waves of 0.5m, 2m or 10m just near the coast or in the middle of the ocean.

I've been out in Spain with a 5,20 meetrs motor boat, to fish, and a storm came in before we realized. We were about 15 miles from the coast, and we had to endure it. Waves were about 2,5 to 3 meters. The boat is a "D" in CE category (so up to 0.5m of waves) and nothing happened.

Pete Goss did a Transat in a 26 foot catamaran, and he even did a good result.

There are lot of M*** owners that do the crossing to Bahamas (80 miles in the gulf stream) and have found real bad conditions, that surpass those of the "C" category.

I am personally very happy of our boat, and knowing that others have endured real bad conditions with the same model gives me some "additional insurance".

But as I said in my first post, when you buy a boat, you find a compromise. In our case, the "trailorable" was a need (Belgium - Spain). And we are 6 of family,(2 adults and 4 children). I spent 1 year looking, and I arrived to the conclusion that, in our case, the M**** was the best choice.

I love sailing. I still dream in turning the world round with a sail boat. I hope I will be able to do it in about 10 years' time. And I know that, at this point of time, I will be buying another boat. One conceptually thought as to turn the world. M***, when thinking in this trailorable boat, never thought of turning the world. It is a boat for short crossing, family holidays.

Fair winds,

Miquel.
Culzean

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[cynthia]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

Some friends of ours had a water ballasted boat some years back (not a Mc..... but a different American brand). The water ballast valve stuck - totally unaware of this fact he set off happily on the first sail of the season and the first gust nearly had him over. He had no idea he had no water ballast whatsoever. Needless to say he changed his boat fairly rapidly after that!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[graham]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

A Mc Thingy 26 capsized a few years ago near Flatholm Island in the Bristol channel, It was motoring with sails down at the time.It remained upside down.

Admittedly it was choppy that day .but several other small craft eg Achilles 24 Hurley 22 and Vivacity were experiencing no problems in the area.

I am sure that there are many people who are happy with them and experienced enough to know there limits.I am just saying that they are not suitable for the inexperienced to go into open waters.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Miquel_Culzean]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

All accidents reported up to now have been mainly because of going without ballast, or with the ballast tank incomplete. In any water ballasted boat, this is a crucial point, I agree, and you have to get used to check it. I certainly do it when the season begins, and when I'm sailing, I check it every day (it takes me 30 seconds). Up to now, I didn't have any problem with the valve, as a lot of other owners.

Another important point to take in account is one's experience in sailing and/or motoring: that can cause also capsizing, and in the best conditions you could ever imagine. But then, this cannot be puted on the boat. For me, seamanship is as important (if not more) than the boat itself. Every one must know one's limitations and the ones of the boat before puting to sea.

As I said before, the concept of those boats is not for ocean cruising, but for coastal cruising and/or short trips. But I don't think they are less prepared than other 26 feet boats in the market, even not water-ballasted, as the concept remains, in the major part of the cases, the same: coastal cruising. I wouldn't go with any 26' to do the Horn. Even if some times, due to brakers and undeep seas, conditions can be worse near the coast than in the middle of the ocean

Another discussion, completely different, is the ability of the boat to sail, so if she points better or worse, or if she is quicker than other 26' or not.

Best regards,

Miquel
Culzean

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kimhollamby]

Not American

To clarify matters I have been contacted by the owner of the boat seen on Loch Lomond which is of Polish extraction (the manufacturer's name has not specifically been confirmed to me and so I am not naming it here). The boat was not a MacGregor 26. The owner reports that the boat did not have any sail up when the inversion happened; the crew was clearing fenders off the side deck.

Quite apart from anything else this misidentification proves why I have, one one occasion only, removed a thread supposedly concerning a MacGregor 26 because reports about its identity were mixed at the time (with the Coastguard calling it a 32-footer in official releases, for example). Views about this model, both for and against, have otherwise been freely expressed in the past.

The Loch Lomond incident is currently being investigated by a naval architect and reported to the manufacturer. Out of respect to the owner I would appreciate it if no further speculation about this specific incident was posted at this point.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Neraida]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

A certain well known French racy cruisy yacht I know is water ballasted and is always very successful in all kinds of races from short to long leg, I admire them actually because I wouldn't dare board a boat that didn't have at least a ton of iron or lead leading straight down but that's just me and my experience.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Re: Upside down American trailer sailer.

I dont understand why anyone would want to fill their boat with water (apart from upwind in heavy weather perhaps) - the extra weight must be a hindrance. I'm much more keen on canting ballast - much more efficient, and the ballast rquirement goes down, not up...

<hr width=100% size=1>