Chris White Atlantic 47, MastFoil

[KLEM KAHO]

Only CW can tell us how much Anna influenced his latest design. However, the notes here suggest that Anna might have been a design issue, ie. an inability to short handle a squall blow. This conclusion would be incorrect. At one time the Anna's log was posted. Careful reading of it showed that 95% of what occurred was Captain's error. He is very experienced, but is prone to Type 2 error - fixing the last thing done wrong. This, rather than anticipation of what may occur and sailing accordingly. The only fault in the design is fairly simple. The mains on 57's have three reef points when they need four. In CW's own review of the event he points out that little is lost from full to the first reef. That is because we all forget this is a PERFORMANCE cruising catamaran. So in reality, reef point one is full and full is really turbo (all things excellent or do not go there). And, below the current reef one, the 57's need three regular reef points. That is a very minor change and with or without it a Captain must anticipate the worst, factor in crew capability and adjust accordingly.

As for the mastfoil, I can follow the math (albeit I need days), but math does not show her sailing, test her in tight circumstances, prove her low maintenance, and demonstrate she is to be counted on. I look forward to the eventual sea trial. Until then, I trust Chris, encourage him to add a reef to the 57 main, and challenge him to continue to wipe away the symetry that has constrained his designs.

[brian eiland]

Originally Posted by KLEM KAHO

Only CW can tell us how much Anna influenced his latest design. However, the notes here suggest that Anna might have been a design issue, ie. an inability to short handle a squall blow. This conclusion would be incorrect. At one time the Anna's log was posted. Careful reading of it showed that 95% of what occurred was Captain's error. He is very experienced, but is prone to Type 2 error - fixing the last thing done wrong. This, rather than anticipation of what may occur and sailing accordingly. The only fault in the design is fairly simple. The mains on 57's have three reef points when they need four. In CW's own review of the event he points out that little is lost from full to the first reef. That is because we all forget this is a PERFORMANCE cruising catamaran. So in reality, reef point one is full and full is really turbo (all things excellent or do not go there). And, below the current reef one, the 57's need three regular reef points. That is a very minor change and with or without it a Captain must anticipate the worst, factor in crew capability and adjust accordingly.

I know what you are saying, but at some point I just don't want to reef down to the smallest size sail area I have every time I see a potential thunderstorm....I would be sailing way below my potential.

So I began to look at anti-capsize devices again...what might be new?...what might be an additional safety factor added to the skipper's decisions?... might even term it a 'back-up' device?

Here are 3 forums I posted on:
Capsize Prevention Devices

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...ces-66876.html

http://www.multihulls4us.com/forums/...ead.php?t=3959