[TSOJOURNER]

I was certain of what I wanted but after looking and investigating - I am now very confused.

The facts are I have MS. So can be a little unsteady on my feet and have lost dexterity in my hands. I will be, in the main, by myself. I use to sail and for many years raced in both monos and cats but under nine meters. The dream is to fully live on-board and whilst I still can, I want to sail around Australia and after that [if I feel I can cope] sail to New Zealand and Hawaii.

I started looking at 35' to 45' Catamarans for obvious reasons: no heeling, most have all the controls leading back to the cockpit, self-tacking jibs, [with] mini-keels opens the options of beaching [drying out], larger living areas.
. . . then there are facts of speed to outrun storms and unsinkability etc etc.

My concerns with cats are: They seem overpriced when compared to comparable mono [normally plus10']. Some of the manufacturers and their operations make you think wow. Also, in their quest for lightness a lot of manufactures have used substandard materials and some of the horror stories I have heard have shook me. They talk of speed and in a racing cat that's a fact - however, in the vessels I am looking at as soon as you put a load on, the speed is gone.

So I have just gone in a big circle and back to what would be a better fit cat or mono. I know if I am caught in a storm I would prefer a keeled boat.

. . . is there anyone in a similar situation, and what did you find?

 

[kaluvic]

Have you looked at tris?
They may have some of the advantages of a cat with less expense as most have single engines, steering......

 

[JomsViking]

I'd second Kaluvic's idea about looking at trimarans, however they're also typically more expensive if you're buying quality. There's a number a nice ones that have been cruised extensively, including the bigger Dragonfly's. Others here have more knowledge of different brands of multihulls, so let's hope they chime in

 

[sailingdog]

Ruby-

I would highly recommend you read my Multihulls in a nutshell post.

Multihulls are generally MORE EXPENSIVE than comparable length monohulls. After all, they require more materials and more labor to build them than a comparable length monohull.

One of the best books to read, if you are truly interested in learning about cruising multihulls, is Chris White's The Cruising Multihull. While it is a bit dated, the information in it is still applicable and it is very well written.

Most of the major manufacturers use the same materials that are used in monohulls, less the ballast of course.

Even though I sail a trimaran, I would say that a catamaran is probably a better choice given his requirements. Trimarans generally have the LEAST amount of cabin space and stowage, out of the three common boat types-mono, cat and tri. They also, generally, have the least load carrying capacity of the three.

 

[kaluvic]

Ruby-

Trimarans generally have the LEAST amount of cabin space and stowage, out of the three common boat types-mono, cat and tri. They also, generally, have the least load carrying capacity of the three.

Wow that really surprises me....
I have no multi hull experience except for sailing a Hobie 16 I owned many years ago.
Thanks for setting me straight.
Maybe I need to read the book you're recommending.

 

[sailingdog]

Glad to help. Most modern trimarans are like mine, where the cabin and stowage is all in the main hull for the most part, and there is no solid wingdeck, unlike older designs, like the Pivers and Browns, which often had some living space in the wing decks, often fairly shallow berths.

Here are photos of two older designs-a 45' Piver trimaran and a Jim Brown designed Searunner-and two more modern designs-a Chris White Hammerhead 54, and a Corsair 36 trimaran.

Piver designed 45' trimaran

A Jim Brown 40' Searunner Trimaran

A Chris White Hammerhead 54

A Corsair 36 trimaran

More modern trimarans are a bit better at load carrying, since the older designs often had simple plywood v-shaped hulls, which had relatively low load bearing capacity and relatively high wetted surface area compared to the more rounded hull forms found today. Also, the use of crossbeams or akas, as opposed to the solid cabin/wingdeck found on the older designs, makes the cabin structure much lighter-although much smaller in volume.

The newer designs, not having a solid wingdeck, don't have the slamming issues to the same degree as the older designs. They are also a bit less likely to "kite", as they don't have as much surface area. The older wingdecks, in really bad storms could act a bit like a kite... which is really bad.

Wow that really surprises me....
I have no multi hull experience except for sailing a Hobie 16 I owned many years ago.
Thanks for setting me straight.
Maybe I need to read the book you're recommending.

 

[labatt]

I met a couple in Warderick Wells, Exumas, Bahamas a few weeks ago that were cruising on their Telstar. They were actively seeking fiberglass cloth and epoxy. We gave them a big bunch of epoxy and someone else gave them cloth. Apparently, one of their ama support structures was pulling apart after a bunch of decent seas (and the fact that they had heavily raced their tri before cruising) and they needed to reglass it. I'm hoping they made it back to the states OK - it seemed pretty structural in nature.

 

[JomsViking]

SD has made some good points - they do have smaller accomodations... It's just that I really like this one: Dragonfly Trimarans by Quorning Boats of Denmark | DRAGONFLY 1200 Presentation

It is expensive, though - enough to make me wanna uke

 

[sailingdog]

Do you know which make/model Telstar it was, and what the hull number or name of the couple or boat was??? I'd be curious to find out more...

There were actually three Telstar models. The original was the Telstar 26, which was a small sport trimaran. Production of the boat was started in England, but moved to the USA when Tony Smith relocated in the 1970s. The second model was the Telstar 35, which was a larger cruising trimaran. Not many of the Telstar 35 were made. Overall there were about 300 of the two models made before a fire in the early 1980s destroyed the molds for the Telstar 26.

When Tony Smith designed and announced the Telstar 28, he started the hull numbers with hull 301, the first prototype, to reflect the previous boats built under the name.

As for the akas on the Telstar 28, when deployed, the akas are primarily dependent on the stainless steel portion of the aka folding mechanism. It can handle some serious stress, as I've found out on my boat. DAMHIK. The system is vulnerable to damage when not fully extended or retracted though.

I met a couple in Warderick Wells, Exumas, Bahamas a few weeks ago that were cruising on their Telstar. They were actively seeking fiberglass cloth and epoxy. We gave them a big bunch of epoxy and someone else gave them cloth. Apparently, one of their ama support structures was pulling apart after a bunch of decent seas (and the fact that they had heavily raced their tri before cruising) and they needed to reglass it. I'm hoping they made it back to the states OK - it seemed pretty structural in nature.

 

[labatt]

It was the 28. I have their boat card on our boat I think, but I'm back in the real world for 3 days. What a trip up from Georgetown... Georgetown to Eleuthera to Nassau to Washington DC to Albany. Our autopilot is having problems so I took the control unit back with me. I had to go through customs and security carrying it - definitely raised a lot of eyebrows. I didn't carry it in a bag or anything and had to put it through metal detectors. "Ummm... what is that?" all of the X-Ray people were asking...

 

[sailingdog]

LOL... one time, going through airport security, I had about a dozen network cables, some small gigabit switches, and battery packs for some wireless routers... and the security people were very, very interested in what was in my carry-in bag.

PM me with their info when you get a chance. I'd like to contact them and find out what happened. I have a guess, but would like to know if I'm write.