Fore and aft bunks or athwart ship?

[Jamie]

For most of my 49 years, I've been a mono sailor, but my younger brother has brought me to 'the dark side' as our parents refer to multihulls.

My wife and I are planning on making the big leap to long range cruising in about two years. Our budget and cruising plans are leading us to a used Lagoon 410 / Leopard 40 / Lagoon 380 / down to a FP Mahe 36 or thereabouts.

I've chartered the Leopard 46 on a couple of occasions and found the accommodations very attractive. Being chartered boats, we were limited to daysailing between islands with no overnight passages. Consequently, I've never slept on a large cat underway which leads to my question:

What is the consensus on the merits of fore and aft arranged master bunks as found on the Lagoon 380 versus the athwart ship bunks found on the Lagoon 410? My gut feeling is that underway, there will almost always be more pitching than rolling or yawing and that sleeping fore and aft would be much more comfortable.

Of course, the fore and aft bunk arrangement also limits the need for one bed mate to crawl over the other to deal with whatever went bump in the night at anchor.

Who's been there and done that on both and willing to share their opinion?

[ireaney]

I would always prefer fore and aft berths to athwartship, I also always liked the Lagoon 410 and I saw a picture where someone had converted the owners suite bunk to fore and aft, hang on a minute, I will see if it is still on my PC .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .........
Found it :D

[2hulls]

Hi Jamie - our bunks, and those on numerous other designs, are intended to be used athwartship as evidenced by the builders placement of reading lights and a book shelf. But we use the bunk in a fore and aft arrangement which is easy to do because it's a perfect square. This allows us to avoid the crawling over problem.

Good luck in your search.

2 Hulls Dave

[colemj]

On our boat, we have a full queen fore/aft and a full queen athwart. We usually sleep in the fore/aft one, but if in a rolly anchorage, we change to the athwart and sleep much better. I like having the choice.

[Jamie]

Thanks for the answers all. I had a hunch that somehow it might be a slightly dumb question - confirmed when reminded that a queen mattress is square :o.

I hadn't thought of the advantage of being able to choose the best orientation for the condition... I guess we could just make the bed up fore and aft underway and cross ways at anchor. :cool:

[2hulls]

- confirmed when reminded that a queen mattress is square :o

So is a king. :D:D

[Nordic]

In my younger days at sea on tankers, the cabins with athwartship bunks were the most coveted, as they offer most comfort when the ship rolls.

Cats and tris don't roll, so if you have to choose, then fore/aft is the best compromise...

Alan

[lhsmith]

I don't know where you get your square matresses, but queen matresses in California are about 78" X 60". Don't know about kings.:)

[TanJera]

I have tried both on the same Knysna 44 during a rather rough trip from Richards Bay to Knysna and for me it was a case of 6 of the one and half a dozen of the other! Biggest problem is to stick to the matress and not the ceiling ::) and the orientation did not make a big difference to that!
The athwart ship bunk is the forward one and the fore/aft one was aft.

I have to add that I can sleep anywhere dry!

Hennie

[Southern Star]

In my experience, the orientation of the berths is less significant than the position: specifically, I find that the aft berths (in my case transverse) have much less motion than the forward berths (in my case oriented fore/aft).

The criticism about having to climb over your bunkmate in a transverse berth is accurate, although it really isn't too difficult so long as the opening is at least half the length of the mattress (in my boat, it is about 2/3rds). Furthermore, it provides an opportunity for some close up and personal contact. Frankly, I tend to linger there on occasion.....

It should also be noted that, except in the case of legitimate island berths, having to crawl into/out of a fore/aft berth and/or turn around when it is occupied, is at least as cumbersome (and generally results in much less romantic contact with your partner).

Since the degree of heel/side to side motion is substantially reduced from a monohull, I don't see the fore/aft orientation of a berth as any more necessary than a gimballed stove. In fact, in most cases you will not (should not) be taking large seas from abeam and hence, the most significant movement is apt to be fore and aft: in cases where the motion is large and/or violent, the athwartship berth provides more comfort in my opinion (while recognizing that 'slamming' into oncoming seas will be uncomfortable regardless of the orientation).

Simply put, neither set up would be a deal-breaker or maker for me.

Brad

[Jamie]

Southern Star,

Now that's information I can use :). Thanks for taking a moment to share your experience. I'll be sure to post a full report (within terms of the site of course) once we choose a boat and move aboard.

[Southern Star]

Jamie, we await your reporting on any difficulties experienced while sliding over your partner (or having her slide over you). While it will tend to be a bit more time consuming (OK, sometimes more than a bit) than just hopping out of, or into bed, in my opinion it falls into the category of time well spent. In fact, I kind of wish my fiance and I were practising our dismount right now...... Anyway, island berths be damned!

Brad