[Slayer]

I am going to Key West at the end of this month and want to rent a sailboat for a day: 35-40 ft. I have looked at few places renting monohulls but there seems to be many more catamarans for rent. Probably better for the shallower waters around the keys.

I am a competent/experienced monohull sailor, but the only catamarans I have sailed are hobie cats. Would my monohull skills allow me to handle a catamaran? Or would that be reckless on my part.

 

[capta]

I am going to Key West at the end of this month and want to rent a sailboat for a day: 35-40 ft. I have looked at few places renting monohulls but there seems to be many more catamarans for rent. Probably better for the shallower waters around the keys.

I am a competent/experienced monohull sailor, but the only catamarans I have sailed are hobie cats. Would my monohull skills allow me to handle a catamaran? Or would that be reckless on my part.

I guess it's really a question if you are actually looking to go sailing or are you going to be happy with a nice, comfortable, roomy condo on the water, that moves.
Since you will most likely be motorsailing at least 50% of the time on the cat, I doubt you will have a lot of problems. They certainly handle better than monohulls under power, with twin screws set so far apart. If you need to go to weather just turn on the down wind engine and find a comfortable RPM to help push you to windward.

 

[bacampbe]

I own a monohull, and have chartered several cats. For the most part, your monohull skills will transfer under sail. It won't sail as close to the wind, and you may find that you have to motor-assist your tacks until you get the hang of it. OTOH, it might outrun all the monos downwind.

The biggest issue under sail is knowing when to reef. You don't get the heeling to tell you you are over powered. You might get some weather helm. Or you might break something. Make a point to talk to your charter company about when to reef.

Under power, it's a bit different. (Assuming the cats you are looking at are twin-screw.) For close-quarter maneuvering, lock the helm and steer with the throttles. It's actually really nice once you get the hang of it--after some practice I could handle a 50 ft cat under power with more precision than my 31 ft mono.

 

[smj]

I guess it's really a question if you are actually looking to go sailing or are you going to be happy with a nice, comfortable, roomy condo on the water, that moves.

Since you will most likely be motorsailing at least 50% of the time on the cat, I doubt you will have a lot of problems. They certainly handle better than monohulls under power, with twin screws set so far apart. If you need to go to weather just turn on the down wind engine and find a comfortable RPM to help push you to windward.

I see you sail a Pearson 53 and my guess is most 53' cats would out sail you. So no you shouldn't have to plan on motor sailing the cat.....unless the cat you charter was designed as a motor sailer.

 

[Multihullgirl]

Capta. Give it a rest. We get that you don't like multihulls. Don't get one. I crew on a well sailed Pearson 36 cutter, and I can tell you from experience that multihulls sail just as well. Without that painful leaning and rolling crap.


Slayer:
if you didn't kill yourself on the H16, you'll be fine. I find the main difference between leaners and multis is in depowering: If you are on a beam reach or running, do NOT round up to stall the sail - head DOWN. If above beam, then round up.

Apparent wind is deceptive. Depending on how much you're getting out of the boat, you might have to trim sail much closer than the true wind angle would indicate. This is why people who don't get it insist that multihulls can't point, but then they don't seem to understand the physics of apparent wind.

Tacking: As you're coming about and are crossing the eye of the wind, loose the main some/travel down some, keep the jib in and allow it to backwind until you're on the new tack. Don't throw the helm hard over, make a U-turn. The jib will help the bows around, and the eased main keeps the boat from vane-ing up into the wind. Remember, the jib pushes the bows, the main pushes the sterns.

Reef often and early. I have a Catana, and I'm generally putting in the first reef at 20kt.* As was said, you'll get weather helm to warn you.

In general, if the helm is hard, drop the traveller some, and check to see whether your jib is trimmed correctly. This is that 'jib pushes bows etc.' thing

enjoy.


_____________________
*just remembered: the Pearson puts her first reef in at 20kt, too...

 

[capta]

I see you sail a Pearson 53 and my guess is most 53' cats would out sail you. So no you shouldn't have to plan on motor sailing the cat.....unless the cat you charter was designed as a motor sailer.

We sail with the bareboat charter company cats around here over a hundred days a year. Most bareboat charter companies DO NOT rent performance cats of any size.
We sail with those stupid roomarans almost daily and they certainly do not sail out sail us.
There are a number of cats that sail very well, Rudy Choy being one designer of excellent sailing cats who I knew and sailed with.
However, I repeat; most bareboat charter companies do not rent performance catamarans, therefore MOST of the time if you are renting a cat from a bareboat company, you are renting a roomaran, and not looking for the best sailboat you can find.

 

[smj]

We sail with the bareboat charter company cats around here over a hundred days a year. Most bareboat charter companies DO NOT rent performance cats of any size.
We sail with those stupid roomarans almost daily and they certainly do not sail out sail us.
There are a number of cats that sail very well, Rudy Choy being one designer of excellent sailing cats who I knew and sailed with.
However, I repeat; most bareboat charter companies do not rent performance catamarans, therefore MOST of the time if you are renting a cat from a bareboat company, you are renting a roomaran, and not looking for the best sailboat you can find.

I can partially agree. I think the problem with most of the bareboat catamarans isn't the boat but the skipper and crew. Let's face it, on a bareboat charter the crew probably has no experience with the type boat they're sailing, nor do they care as they're on vacation. I would imagine an FP or Leopard catamaran, an example of those that are used in charter, would out sail most monos in their size range if they are sailed by crew that have experience with their boats.
May I ask the why you have an attitude towards "roomarans"? I have no use for monohulls but still respect that they are some people's choice and if they enjoy them more power to them.

 

[capta]

Capta. Give it a rest. We get that you don't like multihulls. Don't get one. I crew on a well sailed Pearson 36 cutter, and I can tell you from experience that multihulls sail just as well. Without that painful leaning and rolling crap.

Interesting statement; "you don't like multihulls." If you spent half as much time reading posts on here as you apparently do making up stupid crap like that statement, then you would know I have sailed at least one multihull more than half way around the world.
Your comment is born of ignorance and prejudice, not experience and intelligence.
Again, there are some excellent performance multihulls out there, just like some monohulls, that will outperform the average cruising yacht. They just are not generally available from the bareboat companies.
You can blather all you want about not rolling, but we constantly see the cats in the Caribbean pitching like an ax in the hands of a lumberjack and at anchor the motion can be so jerky with such a quick snap, that all the people can do is go ashore in the day time or to bed, for the night. I notice you NEVER mention either of those two points when you are pushing cats.
EVERY boat has a motion, be it a long slow roll or a quick snapping/jerky one, that can be extremely uncomfortable and it's the performance cats that are the worst in that area, from our observations.
I have spoken to more than a few Lagoon owners who readily admit to using an engine almost all the time, when the wind is forward of the beam, including one who circumnavigated his boat.
Any time you want to come down here and rent yourself a bareboat cat and sail across a channel in snotty weather (20 gusting to 30+ knots and seas 8 to 12 feet) and show me up, well feel free. But I'm guessing that there are plenty of sailors down here, with more multihull experience than you will ever have, that don't make record breaking crossings on bareboat cats, in those conditions.
Your boat may suit you perfectly, but to compare it to mine is foolish.
I have uncounted miles on both multihulls AND monohulls, probably much of it before you were even out of diapers, and made my choice because this boat suited ME.
But to say I don't like multihulls is just plain stupid.

 

[smj]

Capta. Give it a rest. We get that you don't like multihulls. Don't get one. I crew on a well sailed Pearson 36 cutter, and I can tell you from experience that multihulls sail just as well. Without that painful leaning and rolling crap.

Interesting statement; "you don't like multihulls." If you spent half as much time reading posts on here as you apparently do making up stupid crap like that statement, then you would know I have sailed at least one multihull more than half way around the world.
Your comment is born of ignorance and prejudice, not experience and intelligence.
Again, there are some excellent performance multihulls out there, just like some monohulls, that will outperform the average cruising yacht. They just are not generally available from the bareboat companies.
You can blather all you want about not rolling, but we constantly see the cats in the Caribbean pitching like an ax in the hands of a lumberjack and at anchor the motion can be so jerky with such a quick snap, that all the people can do is go ashore in the day time or to bed, for the night. I notice you NEVER mention either of those two points when you are pushing cats.
EVERY boat has a motion, be it a long slow roll or a quick snapping/jerky one, that can be extremely uncomfortable and it's the performance cats that are the worst in that area, from our observations.
I have spoken to more than a few Lagoon owners who readily admit to using an engine almost all the time, when the wind is forward of the beam, including one who circumnavigated his boat.
Any time you want to come down here and rent yourself a bareboat cat and sail across a channel in snotty weather (20 gusting to 30+ knots and seas 8 to 12 feet) and show me up, well feel free. But I'm guessing that there are plenty of sailors down here, with more multihull experience than you will ever have, that don't make record breaking crossings on bareboat cats, in those conditions.
Your boat may suit you perfectly, but to compare it to mine is foolish.
I have uncounted miles on both multihulls AND monohulls, probably much of it before you were even out of diapers, and made my choice because this boat suited ME.
But to say I don't like multihulls is just plain stupid.

That's great, you made your choice because your boat suited you. Have you ever thought maybe the stupid people that bought the stupid roomarans bought them because that's what suited them? I wonder if they look at your boat in an anchorage and consider it stupid. I sure as hell would have never spent my hard earned money on it but that's my choice, and I don't think your stupid for owning it.
It was while I was in the Caribbean that I decided to make the change to multihulls. I got sick of rolling at anchor and was amazed at the lack of roll that the multis have.
Some cats don't point that well to windward and some are plain dogs to sail....but then some monohulls are the same.

 

[Multihullgirl]

Capta

People who resort to ad-hominem as argument never get anywhere with me. I not only have the exact experience you assert I do not have, but it was aboard a 36' Mahé I rented from TMM, when TS Olga formed over our heads. I even have the video to prove it.


BTW, is this your quote:
"It has been suggested on other sites that if a 40 odd foot boat is pitching in an anchorage, this might be reduced by hanging a bag of rocks off the stern and possibly the bow also.
Just off the top of my head, I would guess that this bag would need to weigh a thousand pounds or more to have much effect, if any.
Can one of you really, really smart engineering types on here chime in with a bit of fact based information on this, please. Thank you."

If you have all the experience you claim, you would have your own answer to that question. Buh-bye

 

[capta]

May I ask the why you have an attitude towards "roomarans"? I have no use for monohulls but still respect that they are some people's choice and if they enjoy them more power to them.

Not all catamarans are roomarans and just like not all monohulls are 12 meter racers.
Lagoons and their peers are NOT performance catamarans; they are designed as floating condos on the water and nobody is going to get them to sail well, especially to windward. The bareboat companies probably aren't too wild about renting a boat that does 20+ knots to some guy who can't handle it, so the Lagoons do the job nicely.
But there are the Rudy Choy cats that have always sailed well on any point of sail and many even more modern designs that definitely sail very well. I had a tri that sailed as well as any monohull I've ever been on, except true racers. We did 1200 miles to weather up the Red Sea, often in 25 knots+. Piece of cake. LOL
Roomarans was a term originally coined in the 60's for the trimarans that Horstman and others of that era designed or those home built trimarans that people overbuilt (1/2" plywood hulls instead of 3/8ths, 2 X 4's instead of 1 X 1 inch stringers, etc then they added a huge diesel) to the point none of them could sail their way out of a paper bag.
As these floating condos became all the rage, the term just seemed to apply there as well.
I have nothing against even the Lagoon boats, but realistically, if someone wants to charter a bareboat and if they want to really sail, then a mono would be the better option.

 

[smj]

Not all catamarans are roomarans and just like not all monohulls are 12 meter racers.
Lagoons and their peers are NOT performance catamarans; they are designed as floating condos on the water and nobody is going to get them to sail well, especially to windward. The bareboat companies probably aren't too wild about renting a boat that does 20+ knots to some guy who can't handle it, so the Lagoons do the job nicely.
But there are the Rudy Choy cats that have always sailed well on any point of sail and many even more modern designs that definitely sail very well. I had a tri that sailed as well as any monohull I've ever been on, except true racers. We did 1200 miles to weather up the Red Sea, often in 25 knots+. Piece of cake. LOL
Roomarans was a term originally coined in the 60's for the trimarans that Horstman and others of that era designed or those home built trimarans that people overbuilt (1/2" plywood hulls instead of 3/8ths, 2 X 4's instead of 1 X 1 inch stringers, etc then they added a huge diesel) to the point none of them could sail their way out of a paper bag.
As these floating condos became all the rage, the term just seemed to apply there as well.
I have nothing against even the Lagoon boats, but realistically, if someone wants to charter a bareboat and if they want to really sail, then a mono would be the better option.

We have owned a few multis over the last 23 years so I'm well aware of the origin and meaning of roomaran. Still it's bad taste to refer to them as stupid.
Your right, upwind you would probably out sail the roomaran of comparable size. On any other point of sail I very much doubt it. And there is still a distinct possibility that the roomaran going upwind may be able to foot of a little and still make a better VMG than you.

 

[capta]

Capta

People who resort to ad-hominem as argument never get anywhere with me. I not only have the exact experience you assert I do not have, but it was aboard a 36' Mahé I rented from TMM, when TS Olga formed over our heads. I even have the video to prove it.

BTW, is this your quote:
"It has been suggested on other sites that if a 40 odd foot boat is pitching in an anchorage, this might be reduced by hanging a bag of rocks off the stern and possibly the bow also.
Just off the top of my head, I would guess that this bag would need to weigh a thousand pounds or more to have much effect, if any.
Can one of you really, really smart engineering types on here chime in with a bit of fact based information on this, please. Thank you."

If you have all the experience you claim, you would have your own answer to that question. Buh-bye

You are a piece of work aren't you? You attack me with pure unadulterated BS and get all aflutter when it gets all over you. I assure you, I have absolutely zero desire to "get anywhere" with you. None at all. But please, keep on thinking that you are all that.
I am not at liberty to discuss where the "rocks" thread originated, but I assure you it was not of my making.

 

[Siamese]

Geez. Can you hang on while I go and make some popcorn?

 

[jwing]

Back when I chartered, well, it was in the olden days before the interwebs, and I didn't subscribe to any of the magazines, either. Therefore, I had no idea that catamaran sailing requires significantly different skills than mono sailing, like we all know now thanks to this and other fora of experts. So, with the stupidity of ignorance, my friends and I chartered all manner and sizes of boats. As proof of our foolishness, we actually didn't worry about, well, anything! We even went so far as to enjoy figuring out how to best sail each boat we rented. Furthermore, we had fun on every one of them, regardless of how many hulls, masts, or feet of waterline. We were idiots back then. Heck, we were so dumb that we actually sailed charter catamarans upwind. Can you imagine?

Now, thanks to the internet, we are educated enough to be afraid of everything, especially sailboats!

 

[Sublime]

Didn't those folks from Distant Shores park their really nice Southerly in favor of a cat for their trip to the Bahamas? IIRC, they said it was the perfect boat for the area because of its shallow draft.

If you've got plenty of experience in a mono hull, I'm sure you'll be just fine with a cat. It's not rocket surgery and a few people here have given you tips on how they handle so, you should be good to go. It'd be fun sailing a different type of boat.

 

[Solandri]

BTW, is this your quote:
"It has been suggested on other sites that if a 40 odd foot boat is pitching in an anchorage, this might be reduced by hanging a bag of rocks off the stern and possibly the bow also.
Just off the top of my head, I would guess that this bag would need to weigh a thousand pounds or more to have much effect, if any.
Can one of you really, really smart engineering types on here chime in with a bit of fact based information on this, please. Thank you."

If you want an engineering answer. you don't need to hang rocks. You can just redistribute the weight, either concentrating it more towards the center or spreading it more towards the end.

The tendency of a boat to pitch excessively in certain seas is due to resonance. The driving frequency of the waves happens to match closely to the boat's natural pitching frequency. When these two frequencies get very close to each other, you end up with resonance, which will exaggerate the resulting motions. Kinda like if you slosh water back and forth in the bathtub at the right frequency, you can create really big waves.
Resonance - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I won't get into the math, just say that it has to do with the moment of inertia (distribution of mass fore and aft relative to the c.g.) and dampening. Dampening is why monohulls tend to have less of a pitch problem - their bow and stern tend to flare out a lot, so as they pitch they displace a lot more water, and that tends to dampen out the pitching motion. Catamarans tend to be designed with more vertical sidewalls at the bows and sterns, so there's less dampening. (A SWATH ship is a catamaran designed the opposite way - the majority of the displacement hull volume always remains underwater. So surface waves impart little pitching or rolling moment, and the ship is rock-steady regardless of surface waves.) If it got pretty bad on an anchored catamaran, you could dampen the motion by tying buoys to the bows so that they're dragged underwater as the boat pitches forward. That's increasing the dampening.

But dampening is not the only way to overcome resonance. You can also do it by changing the driving frequency and/or natural frequency so they're no longer a close match. The easiest way is to turn the boat slightly so the waves/swells are hitting it at a slightly different frequency, and thus are no longer a match for the boat's natural pitch frequency. But if you insist that the boat must point in that particular direction, you can change the boat's natural pitch frequency by redistributing mass away from or towards the c.g. You could do it by hanging rocks too, but why take on extra weight when you can just move some water and fuel jerry cans fore and aft?

As for amount of mass, the inertia goes as mass times distance from c.g. squared. So how far you can get the mass away from the c.g. (or move a mass from a distant point to the c.g.) matters a lot more than the amount of mass. e.g. If a jerry can was originally at the c.g., moving it to the end of the bow pulpit will have 4x the effect of moving it halfway to the bow pulpit.

There's also a second order effect on catamarans because their natural pitch frequency tends to be close to their natural roll frequency (or at least, closer than on a monohull). This is what causes the hobby-horse motion. The math for this gets a lot more complicated (in a nutshell, when the boat's pitch and roll inertia are not minimum and maximum moments of inertia, the resulting motion oscillates between the two). This can be combated the same way - moving mass away from the c.g. along one axis while moving it towards the c.g. along the other. But eliminating it requires careful mass distribution so that the boat's inertia tensor is diagonal (mass is distributed fore/aft and port/starboard symmetrically).

tl;dr - there are lots of ways to combat this without resorting to bags of rocks.

 

[ambianceack]

Hi Slayer-

I did not read the above but to answer your question go for the multihull. I chartered one for the first time last fall and it was fun. A few hints that I discovered, To Tack, have some speed and back the head sail once you are on the new tack and moving forward switch the head sail to the correct side; therefore no motor needed to tack.

The multihull had a twin screw so for motoring in tight spots, lock the steering wheel and steer with the two throttles, it is just like driving a zero turn mower. Have Fun, which is the only way to sail and spend time in Key West!

 

[desert rat]

Solandri TY for the epifiny, That is the reason length to breadth on a mono is 3 to 1.

 

[capecodda]

Slayer,

Based on the stuff you've posted here, I know you like to sail in bad weather, and you've got lots of monohull experience. We've chartered multi-hulls a few times, we've only owned monohulls. With your experience, the transition should be a piece o cake. Advice about not "feeling" the need to reef like a mono, and easier to motor in close quarters is all correct. They can be "wicked cool party platforms." Get out of Baaahston and get some sun.

Have fun.