Jordan Series Drogue, some practical questions
- Thread starter Fascadale
- Start date
Boo2
Well-Known Member
Someone above posted this question as well but didn't receive a reply : can anyone tell me why it is necessary to taper the line towards the tip ? Surely it would be stronger without the join in the middle ?
Boo2
Boo2
Zanshin
New Member
Boo2 - it isn't necessary to taper, but smaller line is cheaper, lighter and more compact. The drogue itself is so long that it makes sense to split it into discrete components for ease of use. Just the long leader line should not be oversized, since it needs to absorb shock loads and a seriously oversized one would be too stiff.
boatropes
Well-Known Member
Joining-tapering. Most of the ten or so rigs I have been asked to make or send parts for have been: Tapered by stepping down from 16mm to 13mm (tapering for all the reasons mentioned by others - economy, stretch, stowage). All joins including bridle have been by 10" spliced soft loops which are then 'cowhitched' together. One s/s thimble eye at the anchor end, sometimes two more at the bridle boat ends depending on the chosen boat fittings (avoiding all chafe at the boat ends being fundamental). I've never been asked to incorporate a swivel.
I supply the following parts:-
-13mm and/or 16mm doublebraid nylon (not certified but generally to the USCG spec).
-Selma fids for splicing cones, soft loops and hard eyes, also the s/s thimbles.
-and a splicing service if you're too busy and your budget allows it, £4 per loop/eye.
Barry
boatropes@barryedwards.co.uk
01606 888154
VO5
Well-Known Member
In the open ocean, rough water may look like a storm.
I promise you when you meet a storm you know you have met one.
Then is when you need really serious kit.
I am not an advocate of this contraption.
I promise you when you meet a storm you know you have met one.
Then is when you need really serious kit.
I am not an advocate of this contraption.
boatropes
Well-Known Member
Crikey, and here we all were thinking the US Coastguard's 68 page scientific paper on the subject was to be taken seriously. Is there something better we all should study?
VO5
Well-Known Member
Yes there is.
Just ask me and I will tell you.
Just ask me and I will tell you.
boatropes
Well-Known Member
OK. Is there something more useful which we could study? It would be helpful to the wide readership of threads like this.
VO5
Well-Known Member
Yes, let's start at the beginning, since you quote the US Coastguard.
The US Coastguard I have no doubt do sterling work, but the US Coastguard, like a lot of American institutions view themselves to be the ultimate authority on everything, but are oblivious to the fact they are riddled with incompetence. They don't like it when an idea of theirs which is a blunder is pointed out, from approving arcane ideas to flimsy kit for the use of "boaters" ( A Boater is a hat, not a sailor), from procedures to incomplete lifebouys. What you get as a reply from US Authorities when you legitamitately challenge is their escape clause / reply..... "It's the law....Sir".
Having got over that, I am going to proceed to explain:~
Many yachtsmen confuse a sea state with a weather state.
In the open ocean frequently you can encounter seriously lumpy seas without the accompanying wind to drive them because the cause may be many hundreds of miles away or may even have already subsided.
This condition of rough water serves to test the boat overall and particularly the rig, but it is not a storm.
A storm is a different scenario altogether.
In a storm you have to be absolutely sure of what it is you are doing instead of just bumping about in a rough sea.
Your main concern should be the preservation of full watertight integrity, the integrity of the rig and the welfare and safety of the crew.
To achieve these aims you must be secure in the knowledge that the equipment you have and the way you use it is the absolutely correct way without doubt.
Let's take this one step at a time.
What you want is for your vessel to be calm in the middle of a hooley, and to settle in the troughs and not to be bounced about on the edges of waves, and certainly not for these waves to have the slightest chance of overwhelming the vessel from the beam.
To achieve this the most important factor is DIRECTIONAL STABILITY Directional Stability means that the direction of the vessel has to be harmonious to the sea state and not contradictory to it.
This implies that when the vessel is drifted (under bare poles or with the tiniest of storm jibs) the risks of her being pitch poled has to be eliminated.
This cannot be achieved unless the trail (warps, drogue ) is made to function correctly.
When the trail functions correctly the vessel's stern is held square to the wind and sea and more importantly it is kept DOWN.
It is impotant for the stern to be held down so that the sea cannot get under it, and lift it out of control, therefore pointing it in a DANGEROUS DIRECTION.
When a vessel in a storm is pointed in a dangerous direction it is placed at risk of being pitch poled or rolled over.
In my view the contraption does not meet the criteria for maintaining Directional Stability, though it would most certainly slow the progress of drift considerably, not would it guarantee that the stern would be kept down at all, which is a critical contribution to safety in a following sea.
A different approach to solve this problem is needed.
I will continue with detailed explanation and reasoning in further posts.
The US Coastguard I have no doubt do sterling work, but the US Coastguard, like a lot of American institutions view themselves to be the ultimate authority on everything, but are oblivious to the fact they are riddled with incompetence. They don't like it when an idea of theirs which is a blunder is pointed out, from approving arcane ideas to flimsy kit for the use of "boaters" ( A Boater is a hat, not a sailor), from procedures to incomplete lifebouys. What you get as a reply from US Authorities when you legitamitately challenge is their escape clause / reply..... "It's the law....Sir".
Having got over that, I am going to proceed to explain:~
Many yachtsmen confuse a sea state with a weather state.
In the open ocean frequently you can encounter seriously lumpy seas without the accompanying wind to drive them because the cause may be many hundreds of miles away or may even have already subsided.
This condition of rough water serves to test the boat overall and particularly the rig, but it is not a storm.
A storm is a different scenario altogether.
In a storm you have to be absolutely sure of what it is you are doing instead of just bumping about in a rough sea.
Your main concern should be the preservation of full watertight integrity, the integrity of the rig and the welfare and safety of the crew.
To achieve these aims you must be secure in the knowledge that the equipment you have and the way you use it is the absolutely correct way without doubt.
Let's take this one step at a time.
What you want is for your vessel to be calm in the middle of a hooley, and to settle in the troughs and not to be bounced about on the edges of waves, and certainly not for these waves to have the slightest chance of overwhelming the vessel from the beam.
To achieve this the most important factor is DIRECTIONAL STABILITY Directional Stability means that the direction of the vessel has to be harmonious to the sea state and not contradictory to it.
This implies that when the vessel is drifted (under bare poles or with the tiniest of storm jibs) the risks of her being pitch poled has to be eliminated.
This cannot be achieved unless the trail (warps, drogue ) is made to function correctly.
When the trail functions correctly the vessel's stern is held square to the wind and sea and more importantly it is kept DOWN.
It is impotant for the stern to be held down so that the sea cannot get under it, and lift it out of control, therefore pointing it in a DANGEROUS DIRECTION.
When a vessel in a storm is pointed in a dangerous direction it is placed at risk of being pitch poled or rolled over.
In my view the contraption does not meet the criteria for maintaining Directional Stability, though it would most certainly slow the progress of drift considerably, not would it guarantee that the stern would be kept down at all, which is a critical contribution to safety in a following sea.
A different approach to solve this problem is needed.
I will continue with detailed explanation and reasoning in further posts.
Last edited:
VO5
Well-Known Member
The stern of the vessel can only be kept down EFFECTIVELY if the pull on the trail is such that pull is exerted WHEN NEEDED and relaxed somewhat when NOT NEEDED SO MUCH....and at the same time....that directional stability is maintained THROUGHOUT, so you see there are two things to consider at this stage, not one.....this is apart from the requirement to slow down the boat and to keep her in the troughs and pointing her in the RIGHT DIRECTION and not wandering, because as we reason, the object ADDITIONALLY is to prevent PITCH POLING or BROACHING.
All these requirewments I seriously doubt can be achieved if the trail is such that the strain on it is divided along its length because this would not necessarily give Directional Stability nor keep her stern down effectively nor necessarily keep her in the troughs nor indeed prevent pitch poling or broaching though I do concede it would slow her down, but that, in STORM CONDITIONS is not enough.
All these requirewments I seriously doubt can be achieved if the trail is such that the strain on it is divided along its length because this would not necessarily give Directional Stability nor keep her stern down effectively nor necessarily keep her in the troughs nor indeed prevent pitch poling or broaching though I do concede it would slow her down, but that, in STORM CONDITIONS is not enough.
VO5
Well-Known Member
What you want is Directional Stability presented in such a way that it can be maintained.
You want your vessel to be pointing in the right direction and SLOWED DOWN when going down the slope of a wave so that on reaching the trough SHE DOES NOT DIG HER BOW IN.
Conventional sea anchors or conventional drogues cannot do this. Their pull is constant. It is this constant pull, both when the vessel is going up a wave and down it that causes the vessel not to be under constant and complete control of SPEED and DIRECTION, that allows the risk of her being overwhelmed to creep in.
This risk of FLUCTUATION of the vessel NOT being under constant and complete control has to be eliminated.
You want your vessel to be pointing in the right direction and SLOWED DOWN when going down the slope of a wave so that on reaching the trough SHE DOES NOT DIG HER BOW IN.
Conventional sea anchors or conventional drogues cannot do this. Their pull is constant. It is this constant pull, both when the vessel is going up a wave and down it that causes the vessel not to be under constant and complete control of SPEED and DIRECTION, that allows the risk of her being overwhelmed to creep in.
This risk of FLUCTUATION of the vessel NOT being under constant and complete control has to be eliminated.
VO5
Well-Known Member
What is needed is a better methodology than just slowing the boat down in a STORM, a real STORM, a TOP NINE ~ BOTTOM TEN, or a TEN, or a TOP TEN ~ BOTTOM ELEVEN.....instead of just coping with a BOISTEROUS SEVEN or an EIGHT or ROUGH CONDITIONS.
What is needed is a method of holding her stern down, a method of holding her stern square to the wind and sea, a method of providing reliable directional stability, a method of adjusting her speed to prevent her from digging in her bow on reaching the trough and additionally, of slowing her down, you see ?
What is needed is a method of holding her stern down, a method of holding her stern square to the wind and sea, a method of providing reliable directional stability, a method of adjusting her speed to prevent her from digging in her bow on reaching the trough and additionally, of slowing her down, you see ?
Watson47
Well-Known Member
... and that method/device is .... ?
VO5
Well-Known Member
If you trail a FIXED DROGUE, when the vessel runs down the face of a wave, the restraint is the same as when she is pushed up a wave. This is not satisfactory.
What is needed is for the vessel to be HELD BACK when sliding down the face of a wave, to slow her down, to keep her stern down, for directional stability to be maintained, and for the risk of digging her bow to be eliminated IFat that point the strain on the trail could be eased as the vessel settles in the trough, that would be ideal, would it not ?
And then DEPENDING ON THE PULL EXERTED for the TRAIL and DROGUE to respond ACCORDINGLY for the action of the vessel to be HARMONIOUS and not CONTRADICTORY, yes or no ?
Because if that were the case notwithstanding everything I have mentioned previously here ADDITIONALLY...the stress on the gear (Cleats, trail, drogue)
and the vessel itself...would be less.
Such a methodology does exist. I have personally used it in three horrendous tropical depressions, in four bad storms and in hurricane conditions in the open ocean to my satisfaction the amazement and relief of my crew and the safety of my vessel.
Do you find this interesting so far ?
What is needed is for the vessel to be HELD BACK when sliding down the face of a wave, to slow her down, to keep her stern down, for directional stability to be maintained, and for the risk of digging her bow to be eliminated IFat that point the strain on the trail could be eased as the vessel settles in the trough, that would be ideal, would it not ?
And then DEPENDING ON THE PULL EXERTED for the TRAIL and DROGUE to respond ACCORDINGLY for the action of the vessel to be HARMONIOUS and not CONTRADICTORY, yes or no ?
Because if that were the case notwithstanding everything I have mentioned previously here ADDITIONALLY...the stress on the gear (Cleats, trail, drogue)
and the vessel itself...would be less.
Such a methodology does exist. I have personally used it in three horrendous tropical depressions, in four bad storms and in hurricane conditions in the open ocean to my satisfaction the amazement and relief of my crew and the safety of my vessel.
Do you find this interesting so far ?
Conachair
Guest
I don't have a copy to hand but from memory the case studies in Heavy Weather Sailing experinced the exact opposite of what you say, that the jordan series drogue was very effective at keeping directional stability, stern to the swell. I've never used one or even been in conditions close to needing any kind of drag device so cannot comment but the series drogue does seem to get good press from people who have used them one extreme conditions - have you tried one?
VO5
Well-Known Member
Yes, I did not like it, additionally it was a pig to deploy and a worse pig to retrieve. Horrendous if you are single handed.
VO5
Well-Known Member
And I forgot to add....
Think in terms of Prudent Seamanship and not in terms of theoretical ideology....
Think of scenarios in which the crew is seasick or incapacitated for some reason, then it is as if you are on your own in the ocean.
Then you have to have at hand methods you can guarantee you can handle alone, and competently, without any help whatsoever, whatever the weather.
Think in terms of Prudent Seamanship and not in terms of theoretical ideology....
Think of scenarios in which the crew is seasick or incapacitated for some reason, then it is as if you are on your own in the ocean.
Then you have to have at hand methods you can guarantee you can handle alone, and competently, without any help whatsoever, whatever the weather.
Conachair
Guest
well go on then, what is it??
VO5
Well-Known Member
"SEABRAKE"
Made in Australia.
Adopted and recommended by the Australian Coastguard. Adopted by the Australian Navy.
Researched and developed by an Australian Captain over several years.
Tested in the Bsss Strait, one of the most dangerous seas in the world rivalling Cape Horn, where seas with 60 foot waves in roaring winds are not uncommon.
Check it out. Come back and ask me any questions you like.
I have no commercial interest by the way.
It was introduced to me by an old friend, Captain Philip Smith.
I wish to record publicly my gratitude to him.
The effect on the vessel once the SEABRAKE is deployed is astonishing.
Recovering it is easy. If the vessel is stopped it can be recovered without much effort hand over hand. If under way, it can be winched aboard.
It stows easily, is not clumsy or unduly heavy or bulky.
When the SEABRAKE is deployed she just settles down to the amazement of the crew and a brew can be started in any weather and hot tea broken out all round, or even a hot meal prepared without difficulty. Amazing. All else is nonsense I am telling you.
Made in Australia.
Adopted and recommended by the Australian Coastguard. Adopted by the Australian Navy.
Researched and developed by an Australian Captain over several years.
Tested in the Bsss Strait, one of the most dangerous seas in the world rivalling Cape Horn, where seas with 60 foot waves in roaring winds are not uncommon.
Check it out. Come back and ask me any questions you like.
I have no commercial interest by the way.
It was introduced to me by an old friend, Captain Philip Smith.
I wish to record publicly my gratitude to him.
The effect on the vessel once the SEABRAKE is deployed is astonishing.
Recovering it is easy. If the vessel is stopped it can be recovered without much effort hand over hand. If under way, it can be winched aboard.
It stows easily, is not clumsy or unduly heavy or bulky.
When the SEABRAKE is deployed she just settles down to the amazement of the crew and a brew can be started in any weather and hot tea broken out all round, or even a hot meal prepared without difficulty. Amazing. All else is nonsense I am telling you.
Boo2
Well-Known Member
What happens when the single point drogue you mention is thrown forward by a breaking wave, which then overtakes your yacht just as the absence of tension on the line leads to her broaching ?
Boo2
Last edited: