How do i attach this to my speader?

[srm]

I actually read on another post that you can use a couple of cable ties to secure a shackle or whatever direct to the spreader -to avoid riveting or using screws. Doesn't sound very secure though!

Cable ties used on my boat to secure cables to the gantry, so no significant load, have deteriorated and broken in a few years. I would use tarred nylon twine, obtainable from Fishermen's chandlers for net repair. In my experience a whipping using the thinner size composed of a number of turns each stretched tight, will hold reliably for years.

 

[awol]

If your mast is down you are probably in a yard. Just post which yard and a forumite with a rivet gun (and probably Monel rivets) will appear. Try it and see!

 

[Sandy]

Hi, the thing that my lazy Jack's run through has come off my spreader.

What's the easiest way to re- fix it?

Do I need to buy a riveting tool?

Thanks

Last summer I remove the lazy jack blocks, they now just lay over the spreaders. They will be checked often for chafe.

 

[Crinan12]

If your mast is down you are probably in a yard. Just post which yard and a forumite with a rivet gun (and probably Monel rivets) will appear. Try it and see!

Not the most popular yard but worth a try !
Lochnell.

 

[Daydream believer]

Cable ties suffer from UV & will break over time. You can lash a pulley with small diameter cord; but why not do a proper job & avoid bodging? The lazy jack line needs to run over a pulley to reduce chaffe. It seems pointless for a few £ to cut corners.
I might ask why your lazy jack lines are only used for lowering the sails. Do you not know how to set them so they stay set permanently so they never need setting all season? If so -seek advice. One should not have to alter them at any time --once properly set, just forget.

 

[Crinan12]

Cable ties suffer from UV & will break over time. You can lash a pulley with small diameter cord; but why not do a proper job & avoid bodging? The lazy jack line needs to run over a pulley to reduce chaffe. It seems pointless for a few £ to cut corners.
I might ask why your lazy jack lines are only used for lowering the sails. Do you not know how to set them so they stay set permanently so they never need setting all season? If so -seek advice. One should not have to alter them at any time --once properly set, just forget.

Yeah I'll make sure to rivet or whatever so it's done correctly

With the lazy jacks I'm not sure to be honest. It's just what we've always done. We use them for hoisting the sail and then dropping it. Then put sail ties on and then get the lazy jacks out of the way and we put the mainsail cover on. I don't know if we've ever thought about leaving them up the whole time but I'll look into it this summer. Thanks

 

[LittleSister]

Am I alone in thinking that it's not advisable to have the lazy jacks supported by the spreaders? (I'm assuming that's the OP's situation.)

I think it preferable that the lazy jacks should be supported by the mast (above the spreaders), and the spreaders only used (if required) to pull them wider apart. This avoids any load (especially if the lazy jacks accidentally end up supporting the boom and sail) pulling the spreaders downward and displacing them from their correct position bisecting the angle of the shrouds, and provides that the loads on the fittings' rivets or screws are lateral, and therefore much stronger than vertical, where the loads will tend to be pulling the fasteners out. The mast fittings will be being pulled downward, and any fittings on the spreaders are being pulled inwards.

 

[Crinan12]

Am I alone in thinking that it's not advisable to have the lazy jacks supported by the spreaders? (I'm assuming that's the OP's situation.)

I think it preferable that the lazy jacks should be supported by the mast (above the spreaders), and the spreaders only used (if required) to pull them wider apart. This avoids any load (especially if the lazy jacks accidentally end up supporting the boom and sail) pulling the spreaders downward and displacing them from their correct position bisecting the angle of the shrouds, and provides that the loads on the fittings' rivets or screws are lateral, and therefore much stronger than vertical, where the loads will tend to be pulling the fasteners out. The mast fittings will be being pulled downward, and any fittings on the spreaders are being pulled inwards.

Yeah I have read quite a few comments like yours on various other threads when researching it today

 

[Daydream believer]

Am I alone in thinking that it's not advisable to have the lazy jacks supported by the spreaders? (I'm assuming that's the OP's situation.)

I think it preferable that the lazy jacks should be supported by the mast (above the spreaders), and the spreaders only used (if required) to pull them wider apart. This avoids any load (especially if the lazy jacks accidentally end up supporting the boom and sail) pulling the spreaders downward and displacing them from their correct position bisecting the angle of the shrouds, and provides that the loads on the fittings' rivets or screws are lateral, and therefore much stronger than vertical, where the loads will tend to be pulling the fasteners out. The mast fittings will be being pulled downward, and any fittings on the spreaders are being pulled inwards.

No it is not a problem.
Set full main & tighten the vang & mainsheet. Set the topping lift to be slightly very slack so it does not affect the set of the sail.ie just so it does not affect leech curve. That is probably where most set it anyway,
Drop the sail.
Now the boom & sail etc hangs on the topping lift.
Adjust the lazyjacks to support the bag & sail, but not the boom. If the fitting onto the spreaders or the spreaders themselves cannot support that then one needs to look at the setup because it is under specced.
In any event the lazy jacks should be able to support boom & sail in an emergency, ie if one accidentally let the topping lift off by mistake ( It does happen). But one would not leave it in that position for long. One could always put a stopper on the topping lift at deck level to stop that happening if required.
Personally, I always tighten the topping lift prior to dropping/raising the sail because in rough weather I tend to lay over the boom & sail whilst I secure the sail in the bag & start the zip off at the mast . Hence I put a lot of weight on the kit. It means it is clear of my head when I am standing in the cockpit whilst setting things up

 

[awol]

Not the most popular yard but worth a try !
Lochnell.

Have you asked Andy?

 

[Refueler]

Am I alone in thinking that it's not advisable to have the lazy jacks supported by the spreaders? (I'm assuming that's the OP's situation.)

I think it preferable that the lazy jacks should be supported by the mast (above the spreaders), and the spreaders only used (if required) to pull them wider apart. This avoids any load (especially if the lazy jacks accidentally end up supporting the boom and sail) pulling the spreaders downward and displacing them from their correct position bisecting the angle of the shrouds, and provides that the loads on the fittings' rivets or screws are lateral, and therefore much stronger than vertical, where the loads will tend to be pulling the fasteners out. The mast fittings will be being pulled downward, and any fittings on the spreaders are being pulled inwards.

If you are relying on Lazyjacks to save a boom if Topping Lift not used - then TBH - somethings wrong.

 

[srm]

Am I alone in thinking that it's not advisable to have the lazy jacks supported by the spreaders? (I'm assuming that's the OP's situation.)

Depends on how secure the spreaders are. If they are clamped to the shrouds should not be a problem. On the boat I just sold (Kemp double spreader rig) I was happy to stand on the spreaders when climbing the mast. On an earlier boat with simple tube section spreaders I added a ss wire clamp with the 'legs' under the spreader (the type used for making an eye in flexible wires) to prevent droop.
I prefer lazyjacks on the spreaders as it gives a wider angle for hoisting. Also, I use adjustable lazyjacks so that I can drop the lee side ones when hoisting single handed while sailing close hauled under headsail as all my halyards and reefing are at the mast.

 

[Crinan12]

Have you asked Andy?

No I was looking for him when was there but he's off to Cornwall apparently.
Hopefully that is something he can do? If so I'll speak to him when next at yard.
Thanks

 

[LittleSister]

. . .
I prefer lazyjacks on the spreaders as it gives a wider angle for hoisting. . . .

You can have the wider angle with the lazy jacks supported by the mast (above the spreaders) - the spreaders are then just used to pull them outwards, and don't carry any significant vertical load.

 

[Refueler]

You can have the wider angle with the lazy jacks supported by the mast (above the spreaders) - the spreaders are then just used to pull them outwards, and don't carry any significant vertical load.

OK ... lets consider this ...

I have seen deck fittings carry away when a line is passed round a fitting that creates a change of direction. The fitting that carried away was that fitting creating the change of direction. And in cases I observed - that fitting was same load bearing etc as the anchored point that held.

So my question now is : Your idea to anchor on the mast - then out to spreader and then down to boom level ... are you sure that you will not still risk damage to spreaders if boom + sail falls into the Lazyjacks ?

Force to straighten a line can be serious !!

As Col Nathan P Jessop says in 'A Few Good Men' ... "Maybe I'm just spitballing here ... "

 

[Daydream believer]

OK ... lets consider this ...

I have seen deck fittings carry away when a line is passed round a fitting that creates a change of direction. The fitting that carried away was that fitting creating the change of direction. And in cases I observed - that fitting was same load bearing etc as the anchored point that held.

So my question now is : Your idea to anchor on the mast - then out to spreader and then down to boom level ... are you sure that you will not still risk damage to spreaders if boom + sail falls into the Lazyjacks ?

Force to straighten a line can be serious !!

As Col Nathan P Jessop says in 'A Few Good Men' ... "Maybe I'm just spitballing here ... "

You are looking at it the wrong way round. A small outward force on the middle of a line exerts a much greater load on the ends of the line.
So it stands to reason that if the load on the line is the boom it will not be so great to lift the boom up if one pulls the line sideways in the middle. Now we must accept that the sideways force will not be in the middle but the principle applies.

On my squib we tension the halyard by hand. That goes from the base of the mast to a point along the floor of the cockpit under the foredeck. We then have a tension line with hook to the middle of this length of halyard that pulls it sideways at 90 degrees.. It is really quite easy to apply tension to the halyard by pulling on the tension line which is led back to the crew. The crew can just tug & cleat to adjust halyard as we sail.
Imagine the spreader replacing the tension line & the lazy jack the halyard. Being longer the amount required to pull outward is minimal.
One point is that the downward line to the deck must also go out to the spreader because otherwise it will flap against the mast. This is another reason for fitting the lazyjacks out on the spreaders. But with this system it will need 2 pullies on the spreader as a double sheaved one will not line up . Then you end up with 6 pullies up the mast & lots of chaffe points Or one could use 3 friction rings each side.
To be honest, the weight of the boom on the lazy jacks is more likely to rip the cover than damage the spreader. Over 19 years I reckon my cover has had to go back to sailmaker for maintenance every 2 years & I have had two covers over that time.I take them off in the winter.

 

[LittleSister]

OK ... lets consider this ...

I have seen deck fittings carry away when a line is passed round a fitting that creates a change of direction. The fitting that carried away was that fitting creating the change of direction. And in cases I observed - that fitting was same load bearing etc as the anchored point that held.

So my question now is : Your idea to anchor on the mast - then out to spreader and then down to boom level ... are you sure that you will not still risk damage to spreaders if boom + sail falls into the Lazyjacks ?

Force to straighten a line can be serious !!

As Col Nathan P Jessop says in 'A Few Good Men' ... "Maybe I'm just spitballing here ... "

The spreaders in the arrangement I suggest carry a load which is both very significantly less than the mast (or lazy jacks hung from the spreaders), and one which is almost entirely along the spreader (towards its root on the mast) rather than downward.

I don't know where you get the idea that fittings creating a change of direction carry the same load as the anchor point. That's just not true, unless the turn is 120 degrees or less greater than 180(?) degrees. (That a turning fitting has broken might be because the direction of load was not what it was built for, or just some random failure. It's not because it's carrying the same or greater load.)

For example, on my (modest sized) boat I can use the genoa winches to haul the genoa sheet in tighter than I can do by hand, but even when so loaded I can easily pull the middle of the tensioned genoa sheet to one side by hand. One can also use that difference in load advantage to e.g. 'sweat up' a halyard or mooring line - pull it to one side, quickly haul in the so created slack at one end, then repeat.

 

[LittleSister]

Or anther example. Imagine you ave a 20 stone friend lying in a hammock. Can you pull the line supporting the hammock tighter by hand? I bet you can't. Can you push the middle of the hammock to one side by hand? Easily. And the reciprocal force against you will be trying to push you sideways from the hammock, not along its length.

Consider the shrouds on your boat. Can you pull them lengthways tighter than than the bottle screw? No. Can you push them to one side part way long their length? Easily, and you have to push sideways, not lengthways. The spreader itself does this. It doesn't carry the same load as the mast or chainplate, but much less, and the load on it is not along the length of the shroud, but bisects the angle between the upper and lower lengths of the shroud.

 

[srm]

You can have the wider angle with the lazy jacks supported by the mast (above the spreaders) - the spreaders are then just used to pull them outwards, and don't carry any significant vertical load.

Provided that you are happy with the added (and to my mind totally unnecessary) complications. There is usually more than one way of doing something, of all the options I prefer "the simpler the better".

I am not happy with the geometry you suggest. If the mast attachment is above the spreaders the lazyjacks are pulling the spreaders aft, putting an unfair load on them.

 

[Refueler]

The spreaders in the arrangement I suggest carry a load which is both very significantly less than the mast (or lazy jacks hung from the spreaders), and one which is almost entirely along the spreader (towards its root on the mast) rather than downward.

I don't know where you get the idea that fittings creating a change of direction carry the same load as the anchor point. That's just not true, unless the turn is greater than 180(?) degrees. (That a turning fitting has broken might be because the direction of load was not what it was built for, or just some random failure. It's not because it's carrying the same or greater load.)

For example, on my (modest sized) boat I can use the genoa winches to haul the genoa sheet in tighter than I can do by hand, but even when so loaded I can easily pull the middle of the tensioned genoa sheet to one side by hand. One can also use that difference in load advantage to e.g. 'sweat up' a halyard or mooring line - pull it to one side, quickly haul in the so created slack at one end, then repeat.

Good for you ...

But personally i would not be pushing your idea of spread out to spreaders .. for reasons I gave ...