Re: [PCW] Sinking Catamarans? (Dennis OConnor)
Today's Topics:
- Re: Sinking Catamarans? (Dennis OConnor)
Hi Dennis,
Your thoughtful consideration regarding safety afloat has me curious --
curious in a fashion that has recurred repeatedly to me throughout my 27
years as a yacht dealer.
During that time I've often read about amazingly inventive safety
measures that some boaters seem enthralled by. They have "back-ups for
their back-ups" when it comes to emergency equipment. They have
astoundingly imaginative means of self-righting, or self-rescuing, or
self-saving.
And yet, virtually all of us spend more time (hour for hour) underway in
our automobiles than we do underway in our boats. So why the
over-focused concern about yacht safety?
As a comparison, one might ask among the readers of this site:
Do you and your passengers use 5-point seat restraints in your automobile?
Do you all wear helmets when driving?
Do you have the sort of all-encompassing, tubular roll-cage inner frame
that race-car drivers never race without...and which often allows them
to walk away from spectacular, 100-plus MPH crashes?
Do you have an automatic fire-estinguishing system in your family car?
I'll confess -- I don't have ANY of the above in my automobile. I doubt
that 1 in 1,000 -- no, make that 1-in-100,000 -- drivers on the road do.
More to the point, I've never met any automobile driver who DOES take
the time and effort to incorporate those safety features into their use
of automobiles, even though they could for a fraction of the cost of a
modest-priced boat.
You no doubt see where I'm heading with this inquiry. And I don't mean
to be hammering on you in particular, Dennis. Your concern is
commendable. Further, you're certainly not the only yachtsman who has
expressed such zeal when it comes to safety afloat. But I suspect that
there are more than a few other readers of this site who, like me, would
be interested in hearing from those cruisers who have spent substantial
time and research in the subject of at-sea safety, WHAT motivated them
to do so?
To get that conversational ball rolling, here's my query: Why is it, or
what is there about cruising the seas that so much more frequently
generates so more concern than the much higher risk of driving an
automobile.....even though (a) we spend more time underway in our
automobiles than we do in our boats?, (b) we are so much more frequently
at risk of grave personal danger/injury in our automobiles than in our
boats?, (c) it would cost less to greatly improve our safety in our cars
than it does in our boats?
Your thoughts?
Fair winds & smooth seas,
Rod Gibbons
Cruising Cats USA
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 06:10:44 -0800 (PST)
From: Dennis OConnor ad4hk2004@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [PCW] Sinking Catamarans?
To: power-catamaran@lists.samurai.com
Message-ID: 20060313141044.48937.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Safety has to be designed into the boat, not added on after wards... The aluminum cat that sank after being holed was strictly negligence by the designer... To say that the needs of the market didn't allow adequate flotation is a cop out... The rising tide of liability litigation in the USA makes ignoring flotation issues a highly risky endeavor for the designer, and the boat builder, and the yacht broker...
I am deep into the design of a power cat... Construction to start this summer... Safety is "job one" in the design... The bow and stern have flotation compartments that double as crash barriers... In addition there are areas that will form flotation compartments between the inner liner and the outer hull..
The bridge deck material is a foam sandwich with plywood and fiberglass facings... With both hulls completely holed and breaching all the flotation tanks she will still float with the floor of the bridge deck awash (worst case)... One would wait out the storm in the pilot house six feet above the water level...
In addition, should she overturn <unlikely, but god forbid> we have included emergency hatches that allow one to exit through the bottom onto the <now> topsides of the bridge-deck floor...
Some of the other issues I am addressing... By designing a shallow draft hull we have no keel as such... This allows the hulls to slide sideways through the water easily when taking a wave on the beam... Being compliant allows the cat to act like a raft in a wild seaway, bobbing over the waves and going with the forces not fighting them... A keel boat, or even a deep draft power hull, will have more resistance to going sideways setting the boat up to be rolled...
Also planned is to have a storm drogue ready to be deployed... These will be on each deck, in a compartment, fully rigged and anchored, requiring only to have the hatch opened and the weighted end of the drogue thrown into the water... Attempting to rig a sea anchor while being battered by waves and wind is not a good scenario... Having the equipment ready to deploy in a moment with only one hand, is much better..
denny
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Power-Catamaran Mailing List
End of Power-Catamaran Digest, Vol 13, Issue 9
On Mar 14, 2006, at 4:26 PM, Rod Gibbons wrote:
To get that conversational ball rolling, here's my query: Why is
it, or
what is there about cruising the seas that so much more frequently
generates so more concern than the much higher risk of driving an
automobile.....even though (a) we spend more time underway in our
automobiles than we do in our boats?, (b) we are so much more
frequently
at risk of grave personal danger/injury in our automobiles than in our
boats?, (c) it would cost less to greatly improve our safety in our
cars
than it does in our boats?
Logically, what you say makes a lot of sense. The fact is that most
people are not very logical. Death at sea is seen as worse than being
killed in an auto wreck. Death by murderous assault, child abuse,
etc. is felt to be worse than being hit by a car when a pedestrian. I
used to see and wonder at this all the time during my decades in
traffic law enforcement and accident investigation. Death just isn't
as bad when it happens in a car wreck as when it happens in plane
crash, a criminal assault, etc. unless it happens to you or someone
you love. Then it's just as bad as dying from cancer.
Back to the sea, look at all the discussion and news reports when
someone is attacked by sharks! That's a terrible disaster!
Factually as more people are killed by bees in the United States each
year than are attacked by sharks in the whole world, and most shark
attacks are survived.
Another reason for this mental approach may be the idea that when you
are out in the middle of an ocean and have a problem, you are most
definitely on your own. If you are the victim of something on the
road you usually have all kinds of emergency services available. It's
not rational, but that's the way most people feel.
Fair winds and happy bytes, Dave Flory, San Jose, CA.
Speak softly, study Aikido, & you won't need to carry a big stick!
See my photos @ http://homepage.mac.com/dflory
While on one level, Rod makes sense (accident safety), however on another level (self sufficiency) we are not talking about helmets and roll cages, as David points out, it's a matter of infrastructure and support and I'm not sure that's irrational.
When your car bursts into flames, you walk away, call a friend or taxi on your cell phone and go home. Then you pick up a rental, go on your way until you r insurance repairs/replaces the old one. It's a shockingly efficient system. When your car makes a funny noise, you stop by the shop and they check it out in 30 minutes or give you a ride to work and you pick it up later. When the whether is bad, you stay home.
If your boat starts flooding you can't just stand on the side of the road with your thumb out. Certainly if you are coastal cruising in range of sea tow, you have a similar option, although it will take a lot longer. Certainly getting someone to help with a mechanical problem is a real ordeal, even in the most densly populated marina, much less 1000 miles from land or at coastal island. When the weather is bad, and you are offshore, there is nowhere to wait it out.
I think the real subtext to Rod's comment may be, most people never take their boats out of sight of land or range of cell phones and seatow, so lighten up. For those truly going long distance or offshore, it's more akin to taking your Winnebego through the amazon jungle, so be prepared.
I'm looking forward to the comments from those of you with a lot more offshore than I.
Mark
David Flory daflory@speakeasy.net wrote: On Mar 14, 2006, at 4:26 PM, Rod Gibbons wrote:
To get that conversational ball rolling, here's my query: Why is
it, or
what is there about cruising the seas that so much more frequently
generates so more concern than the much higher risk of driving an
automobile.....even though (a) we spend more time underway in our
automobiles than we do in our boats?, (b) we are so much more
frequently
at risk of grave personal danger/injury in our automobiles than in our
boats?, (c) it would cost less to greatly improve our safety in our
cars
than it does in our boats?
Logically, what you say makes a lot of sense. The fact is that most
people are not very logical. Death at sea is seen as worse than being
killed in an auto wreck. Death by murderous assault, child abuse,
etc. is felt to be worse than being hit by a car when a pedestrian. I
used to see and wonder at this all the time during my decades in
traffic law enforcement and accident investigation. Death just isn't
as bad when it happens in a car wreck as when it happens in plane
crash, a criminal assault, etc. unless it happens to you or someone
you love. Then it's just as bad as dying from cancer.
Back to the sea, look at all the discussion and news reports when
someone is attacked by sharks! That's a terrible disaster!
Factually as more people are killed by bees in the United States each
year than are attacked by sharks in the whole world, and most shark
attacks are survived.
Another reason for this mental approach may be the idea that when you
are out in the middle of an ocean and have a problem, you are most
definitely on your own. If you are the victim of something on the
road you usually have all kinds of emergency services available. It's
not rational, but that's the way most people feel.
Fair winds and happy bytes, Dave Flory, San Jose, CA.
Speak softly, study Aikido, & you won't need to carry a big stick!
See my photos @
Power-Catamaran Mailing List
I'm not sure what Dennis' plans are for his boat, so I can't comment on
his level of preparedness, and since I don't have extensive offshore
experience I'm not really qualified to comment regardless.
But as I write this, the Coast Guard has just called off the search for
two local commercial fishermen, salmon trollers, who were lost in inside
waters, no more than a few miles from shore. One was 18, the other left
a wife and two small children - he was a very experienced seaman. An
empty survival suit was all that was found. The man's wife has been
frantically trying to arrange more search flights to the area... Any
discussion of 'levels of risk' seem somewhat irrelevant right now - if
these guys had been on an unsinkable boat would they be alive today?
But talking about risk, Rod makes a few statements that warrant further
inspection. For instance, statistically are we really more at risk in a
car than in an offshore boat? Compare it mile to mile or hour to hour -
I don't know the statistics myself, but it would provide a better basis
for this discussion.
Rod raises some very good points about car safety equipment, or the lack
thereof. I don't have 5 point seat restraints or crash cages in my car
either. But consider the safety equipment that cars DO have - air bags,
crumple zones, antilock brakes, shatterproof glass, steel belted
tires... the list goes on and on. Much of this is mandated by stringent
federal safety standards, and some is done as a result of market demand
or litigation avoidance.
Do similar safety standards exist for boats? Certainly the Coast Guard
has some basic ones such as flares, running lights, PFD's, etc, but
unless I'm running a boat for hire I can practically set sail on a bale
of straw. It's a different set of standards than with cars, and the
almost universally recognized assumption is that if you go to sea YOU
are primarily responsible for the safety of your boat.
Then there's the consideration of consequences. Mark hit the nail on
the head with his point that in a car you can step out and walk away
from a minor mishap. If your motor fails during an offshore passage,
it's a serious situation indeed! In your car you can cell phone a
friend or tow truck - in your boat you either deploy a backup system or
cry MAYDAY for the thinly stretched Coast Guard and hope they show up,
locate you, and rescue your ass before it's too late. It was 'too late'
for our local fishermen this time.
Bob Deering
Juneau Alaska
Part of the thrill and beauty of being at sea is the certainty that one is
no longer a part of life ashore. That's also what makes for a thoughtful, or
"prudent" mariner. Not only is the open ocean unforgiving of mistakes, it is
entirely indifferent to accidents. Plenty of extraordinarily competent
mariners have simply disappeared - Joshua Slocum, for example.
Were it otherwise, we wouldn't love the sea so much, nor would we take as
much joy from contemplating a well-found boat. But every boat there's ever
been was a compromise. Each of us has to reconcile our ambitious plans with
our finite resources. Where those two intersect becomes vessel we embark in.
Yachting is far safer than driving in highway traffic, but depending on
where we go and when, the stakes can be far higher. Things become more
thought-provoking (and as mariners we become more prudent) when others go to
sea with us. Our passengers and crew have decided to put their trust in our
forethought and experience. Anyone who has ever been offshore at night, on
watch alone, with others sleeping peacefully below, knows something about
that responsibility. That's when the mind turns to all the things that can
go wrong (is there an unseen timber awash just ahead, poised to hole the
bow? Are those seacocks and their gaskets really free of corrosion?). That's
when the prudent mariner sharpens his thinking about how to answer each
prospective crisis. (Or hops below to have another look at the seacocks)!
However, if we prepare for every contingency, we'd never go anywhere -- I
think we've all known sailors like that, too. On that topic, Captain Slocum
ultimately advised: "Go."
Alan Bliss
Gainesville, Florida
-----Original Message-----
From: power-catamaran-bounces@lists.samurai.com
[mailto:power-catamaran-bounces@lists.samurai.com] On Behalf Of Robert
Deering
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2006 11:27 PM
To: 'Power Catamaran List'
Subject: Re: [PCW] Sinking Catamarans? (Dennis OConnor)
I'm not sure what Dennis' plans are for his boat, so I can't comment on
his level of preparedness, and since I don't have extensive offshore
experience I'm not really qualified to comment regardless.
But as I write this, the Coast Guard has just called off the search for
two local commercial fishermen, salmon trollers, who were lost in inside
waters, no more than a few miles from shore. One was 18, the other left
a wife and two small children - he was a very experienced seaman. An
empty survival suit was all that was found. The man's wife has been
frantically trying to arrange more search flights to the area... Any
discussion of 'levels of risk' seem somewhat irrelevant right now - if
these guys had been on an unsinkable boat would they be alive today?
But talking about risk, Rod makes a few statements that warrant further
inspection. For instance, statistically are we really more at risk in a
car than in an offshore boat? Compare it mile to mile or hour to hour -
I don't know the statistics myself, but it would provide a better basis
for this discussion.
Rod raises some very good points about car safety equipment, or the lack
thereof. I don't have 5 point seat restraints or crash cages in my car
either. But consider the safety equipment that cars DO have - air bags,
crumple zones, antilock brakes, shatterproof glass, steel belted
tires... the list goes on and on. Much of this is mandated by stringent
federal safety standards, and some is done as a result of market demand
or litigation avoidance.
Do similar safety standards exist for boats? Certainly the Coast Guard
has some basic ones such as flares, running lights, PFD's, etc, but
unless I'm running a boat for hire I can practically set sail on a bale
of straw. It's a different set of standards than with cars, and the
almost universally recognized assumption is that if you go to sea YOU
are primarily responsible for the safety of your boat.
Then there's the consideration of consequences. Mark hit the nail on
the head with his point that in a car you can step out and walk away
from a minor mishap. If your motor fails during an offshore passage,
it's a serious situation indeed! In your car you can cell phone a
friend or tow truck - in your boat you either deploy a backup system or
cry MAYDAY for the thinly stretched Coast Guard and hope they show up,
locate you, and rescue your ass before it's too late. It was 'too late'
for our local fishermen this time.
Bob Deering
Juneau Alaska
Power-Catamaran Mailing List
<SNIP> Alan wrote
Were it otherwise, we wouldn't love the sea so much, nor would we take as
much joy from contemplating a well-found boat. But every boat there's ever
been was a compromise. Each of us has to reconcile our ambitious plans with
our finite resources. Where those two intersect becomes vessel we embark
in.
Well articulated, Alan.
Put briefly, I believe that as prudent seamen we plan a voyage to the best
of our abilities, take reasonable precautions based on probabilities rather
than possibilities and then go.
Mark suggested-
"For those truly going long distance or offshore, it's more akin to taking
your Winnebago through the Amazon jungle, so be prepared."
If I were mad enough to attempt this I would take a Land Rover not a
Winnebago. Not as comfortable but built for the job. <grin>
Regards
Roger Bingham
France