Genoa clearance over pulpit rail

[chris-s]

When ordering a new 110% Genoa I’m wondering whether we should size the luff so it clears the pulpit rail or not. The rail is about 9” above the furling drum tack eye. The current Genoa is positioned to clear it but is also undersized on the luff anyhow.

 

[duncan99210]

Both on my Bavaria 38 and my Hurley 18 the genoa is sized so that it clears the pulpit and guardrail. This stops the foot of the sail wearing and also improves visibility forward. If you want to maintain then sail area, then it’s easy enough to get the sailmaker to adjust the leech and foot lengths to compensate for the shorter luff.

 

[CAPTAIN FANTASTIC]

It is very annoying when the genoa constantly rubs against the pulpit; it should be cut so that it clears the pulpit and stanchions and be able to see underneath it for safety purposes.

 

[TernVI]

Both on my Bavaria 38 and my Hurley 18 the genoa is sized so that it clears the pulpit and guardrail. This stops the foot of the sail wearing and also improves visibility forward. If you want to maintain then sail area, then it’s easy enough to get the sailmaker to adjust the leech and foot lengths to compensate for the shorter luff.

That's not really a Genoa is it?
The endplate effect of the genoa on the deck aids efficiency significantly.
Horses for courses, of course.

But if the OP is looking for a 110% sail, may be consider something which (nearly?) touches the deck but doesn't overlap much?
It should be easy to tack without getting near the guard rails and perform nicely up wind.
Basically a 'blade jib'.

Could be worth talking to a few sailmakers who are familiar with the modern rigs with low overlap?

 

[duncan99210]

A genoa is a sail which extends behind the mast, nothing to do with sweeping the deck. See here Genoa (sail) - Wikipedia.

 

[TernVI]

Wiki is hardly the authority on this.
Any muppet can write on there, and lots have.
You can have the clew behind the mast with a Yankee.
A genoa has a low clew.

 

[sailorman]

My Genoa tack is on the drum, i had the clew cut a bit higher than the previous one i had made as i was quite a few yrs older & needed a clearer view forward, having said that, going up weather i sit to leward

 

[duncan99210]

I’ve just spent a few minutes searching various definitions of a genoa: no where makes mention of it being a deck sweeper but all mention that the clew comes behind the mast and the overall sail area exceeds the foretriangle area. Perhaps you can find a definition that makes mention of a genoa needing to descend to deck level to be a genoa?

 

[Channel Sailor]

I would say it depends what you want from sailing your yacht, maybe where you sail (ocean or offshore or coastal) and crew numbers. I have three Genoa's of varying ages, two have a strop from tack to the drum so you can see under them easily and they do not need the foot lifting over the guard rail when winching in. One of these two has a slightly shorter luff with a short strop at the top so the tack height can be adjusted slightly up and down for slightly better performance or increased visibility.

But I prefer by far the 3rd one which has a full length luff, not very much overlap and a low ish foot height. Yes it does need lifting over the guard rail regularly and it is not very easy to see around it. Why do I prefer the full length luff one, because the performance is so much better to windward, less heel when reefed and as it happens also good on a reach. If shorted handed or I need the easy visibility I simply put in a few turns on the reefing so it clears the rail. Low deck sweepers or thereabouts I would guess do not fully furl quite so well and with a few turns on the reefing drum in may not offer any increased visibility underneath. A very low deck sweeper I suppose would need the reefing drum below deck level.

On a different yacht and different style of sailing, yes I would probably prefer a higher tack and clew.

BTW, a low clew I think increases the load on the genoa track turning block compared to a higher clew. Higher clew mean there could be a reduced need to tweak the position of the genoa track car. So if you have plunger type locking on the genoa track car, then maybe a low clew height roller reefing genoa could be too much hassle.

A high clew genoa when fully furled can result in you not being able to reach up to the clew from the deck, which could be awkward sometimes.

A good sail maker should be able to advise what would be best for the yacht and for your type of sailing.

 

[William_H]

As said it is all a question of performance versus conveninece. Yes a high tack will enable you to more easily see under the sail and will avert chafe on the pulpit and guard wires. It will also reduce the possibility of green water hitting the sail . But as said the end effect efficiency of the foil is lost and you end up with drive and so heeling forces higher up. I like to race and get the best wind ward performance from my boat so I go for lowest possible tack. But then I won't have roller reefing anyway. ol'will

 

[Stemar]

The endplate effect of the genoa on the deck aids efficiency significantly.

I can see that on a boat without guard wires, or when the genny is sheeted in si tightly it's inside them, but surely any endplate effect will be lost as soon as the sail is scrunched over the wires, something which will do nothing for either its shape or longevity.

I guess any sail is a compromise, but my compromise, agreed by my sailmaker, was to have the genny clear the wires. Being able to see a bit under it is an added advantage, especially in the Solent! Out and out racers may well have different compromises.

 

[Laminar Flow]

William H and Channel sailor have made various good points.

Luff length provides drive to windward. The main benefit of a low cut genoa or a deck sweeper is that the deck acts as an end plate, increasing apparent aspect ratio.

Unless performance is of paramount importance there are good, practical reasons for raising either the tack, the clew or both.

Other than off the wind, lowering the clew, while raising the tack to clear the pulpit, will not increase drive, but it will increase the tendency to scoop waves in heavy going while reducing forward visibility.

 

[[2574]]

Slightly off the discussion but apposite is that I remember Tom Cunliffe commenting that a big genoa is a hindrance in our northern latitudes but good for the Mediterranean. I read that after having bought a 140% genoa which I rapidly learned was too big. Something more like 110% is a much more useful sail. Well, for plod along cruisers like me, anyway.

 

[Neil_Y]

When ordering a new 110% Genoa I’m wondering whether we should size the luff so it clears the pulpit rail or not. The rail is about 9” above the furling drum tack eye. The current Genoa is positioned to clear it but is also undersized on the luff anyhow.

For cruising on my last boat and on a friends there was a high cut sail which gives good visibility, it was a high cut No2 Geny. It ended up being the preffered all round sail.

 

[Euphonyx]

do you mean a Yankee cut or do you mean that the tack of the sail is high. That would look weird.. no?

 

[beermonkey]

I’ve just spent a few minutes searching various definitions of a genoa: no where makes mention of it being a deck sweeper but all mention that the clew comes behind the mast and the overall sail area exceeds the foretriangle area. Perhaps you can find a definition that makes mention of a genoa needing to descend to deck level to be a genoa?

Almost like some folks want words to have a personal definition eh? Well, that's what "I" call it....

 

[johnalison]

Slightly off the discussion but apposite is that I remember Tom Cunliffe commenting that a big genoa is a hindrance in our northern latitudes but good for the Mediterranean. I read that after having bought a 140% genoa which I rapidly learned was too big. Something more like 110% is a much more useful sail. Well, for plod along cruisers like me, anyway.

Coming from a masthead rig, I was a bit surprised when ordering our current 19/20 boat that the standard sail was 110%. I was advised to give it a go for a year or two and then decide what I needed. In the event, we were pagued by high winds for much or our sailing at the time and the 110% turned out to be ideal. It doesn't look like a genoa, so I usually call it a 'jib', but might occasionally call it a genoa, depending on the context.

Most furling headsails are cut high at the foot anyway. I always assumed that this was because it simplified furling, which is what I was told, but for cruising it makes sense for practical reasons. We had a deck-sweeping genny on our 26-footer, but this was a pain as one of the children would have to go forward at every tack when we were racing to flip the sail back.

 

[dunedin]

Slightly off the discussion but apposite is that I remember Tom Cunliffe commenting that a big genoa is a hindrance in our northern latitudes but good for the Mediterranean. I read that after having bought a 140% genoa which I rapidly learned was too big. Something more like 110% is a much more useful sail. Well, for plod along cruisers like me, anyway.

Not sure if Tom C ever did say that - but it is complete nonsense. It depends upon what rig and sails the boat was originally designed for.

Many IOR fashion follower boats from the 70s and 80s had large masthead overlapping genoas and tiny mainsails (due to the way IOR rated sail areas, though no reason why this was copied by many cruising boats at the time). They would be seriously underpowered with a 105% style blade jib, irrespective of sailing waters.

Modern boats like Hanse by contrast have proportionately massive mainsails, as they are designed from the outset to have fractional rig and narrow self tacking jibs. Most modern cruising yachts are closer to Hanse, with large mainsail and perhaps 9/10 or even 15/16 fractional rig, and a 105-110% jib - supplemented by an asymmetric on a furler (not hugely different in size to a 160% ghoster genoa from the 70s).

So optimum foresail size and shape depends on boat design and usage (though it is often true that better sailcloth and a foam luff will improve most furling foresail shape).

 

[[2574]]

Not sure if Tom C ever did say that - but it is complete nonsense. It depends upon what rig and sails the boat was originally designed for.

Many IOR fashion follower boats from the 70s and 80s had large masthead overlapping genoas and tiny mainsails (due to the way IOR rated sail areas, though no reason why this was copied by many cruising boats at the time). They would be seriously underpowered with a 105% style blade jib, irrespective of sailing waters.

Modern boats like Hanse by contrast have proportionately massive mainsails, as they are designed from the outset to have fractional rig and narrow self tacking jibs. Most modern cruising yachts are closer to Hanse, with large mainsail and perhaps 9/10 or even 15/16 fractional rig, and a 105-110% jib - supplemented by an asymmetric on a furler (not hugely different in size to a 160% ghoster genoa from the 70s).

So optimum foresail size and shape depends on boat design and usage (though it is often true that better sailcloth and a foam luff will improve most furling foresail shape).

I’m not so sure it is complete nonsense because a big 150% genoa rolled up to be a 110% genoa is a bag of rats. Much better to have a smaller sail in the first place. What is complete nonsense is IOR fashion followers.....

 

[TernVI]

.... What is complete nonsense is IOR fashion followers.....

But you'll still get lots of people telling you what wonderful boats Contessa 32s are.....