As a change from Anchors ... Flag etiquette... ironmongery at the masthead....

??

The cheek block for the burgee halyard weighs a few grams. If you consider that excessive ironwork at the top of the mast then you or I are in the wrong pastime.

Extra holes drilled in mast, only external halyard on a modern alloy mast. Completely redundant as I already have flag halyards to both lower spreaders. In most things I am all for tradition - I lower ensigns at sunset and have been known to dip them to warships, but masthead burgee placement on a garden cane is a step too far back.
 
In most things I am all for tradition - I lower ensigns at sunset and have been known to dip them to warships, but masthead burgee placement on a garden cane is a step too far back.

How about if you just tie the burgee into the infinite loop line that runs between the two tiny blocks, one at the top of the metal pole bolted to the masthead and one at chest height? Ie dispense with the pig stick. Pull one side of the infinite loop to hoist straight to 1-2m over the masthead, where the burgee flies comfortably over the instruments and antenna. Pull on the other side to retrieve it to eye level where it nestles in the forward end of the stack pack, protected from UV. Simple.

Only disadvantage over the pig stick arrangement is that sailing in circles you can wrap the burgee around the pole and line. But the same is true if you hoist it under the starboard spreader. To unwrap it you just haul it down a few feet and back up again.
 
Extra holes drilled in mast, only external halyard on a modern alloy mast. Completely redundant as I already have flag halyards to both lower spreaders. In most things I am all for tradition - I lower ensigns at sunset and have been known to dip them to warships, but masthead burgee placement on a garden cane is a step too far back.

I completly agree.

It is a bit like the previous life I lived before sailing, racing Vintage motorcycles. Things were improved and it would have been stupid to not use the improvements, especially those relating to reliability and safety.

Some blowhards would have had me performing wearing a cardboard pudding basin crash helmet so it looked correct for the period.

Doing in excess of 120MPH with one of those would have been foolhardy.

Traditional Narrow Boats with antique engines exist in fair numbers. It is a pretty skilled job to operate the speed wheel throttle and the crash gearbox when turning in a tight space.

Thats why more up to date technology has superceeded the old time ways.

I am all for tradition where it matters.

IMHO, the matter in question does not.
 
I completly agree.

It is a bit like the previous life I lived before sailing, racing Vintage motorcycles. Things were improved and it would have been stupid to not use the improvements, especially those relating to reliability and safety.

Some blowhards would have had me performing wearing a cardboard pudding basin crash helmet so it looked correct for the period.

Doing in excess of 120MPH with one of those would have been foolhardy.

Traditional Narrow Boats with antique engines exist in fair numbers. It is a pretty skilled job to operate the speed wheel throttle and the crash gearbox when turning in a tight space.

Thats why more up to date technology has superceeded the old time ways.

I am all for tradition where it matters.

IMHO, the matter in question does not.

My father-in-law has spent his retirement building a steam launch. Must be one of those blowhards (actually there's not much doubt on that point). But he has had the wit to name the boat "Anachronism".
 
Last edited:
A wet bamboo stick close and parallel to a VHF monopole.An interesting problem for an RF field simulation package perhaps.
Personally I wouldn't have such a flappy contraption anywhere near the pricey masthead sensors and I'd worry it could jam a main halyard, or worse entangle itself in a Code 0/Assy halyard requiring a trip up the mast at a seriously bad time! But re your comment above: I kind of get that proximate objects can shift the antenna’s resonant point and thereby render it less efficient. Metal objects and leccy circuits are the obvious culprits, but I’m guessing that a salty electrically conductive bamboo effectively extending the mast might also do something. If the bamboo was mounted say 50 cm (c. ¼ wavelength) from the antenna …well to be honest I haven’t a clue! What would you say practically speaking?
 
Last edited:
Personally I wouldn't have such a flappy contraption anywhere near the pricey masthead sensors and I'd worry it could jam a main halyard, or worse entangle itself in a Code 0/Assy halyard requiring a trip up the mast at a seriously bad time! But re your comment above: I kind of get that proximate objects can shift the antenna’s resonant point and thereby render it less efficient. Metal objects and leccy circuits are the obvious culprits, but I’m guessing that a salty electrically conductive bamboo effectively extending the mast might also do something. If the bamboo was mounted say 50 cm (c. ¼ wavelength) from the antenna …well to be honest I haven’t a clue! What would you say practically speaking?

The ex boat was a gaff cutter and she sailed around for donkey's years with the VHF antenna about 25 cms from the bamboo and fencing wire burgee stick - the burgee would lovingly embrace the antenna and then shake itself free. I didn't notice any effect. She didn't have the other ironmongery, as in those days I held to the belief that wind came in two forms - not enough or too much - and two directions - the right one or the wrong one. But nowadays I know better.
 
Top