Ketch Rigging (Help)

[AntarcticPilot]

As I said the triatic only stops the mizzen falling over backwards, and the only force making it do that is the mizzen main sheet when taut. The forward pair of mizzen side stays should be more than enough for that with a relatively small mizzen sail and short boom.

Brigantines with large mizzen sail and often clew on boom behind boat, had a much greater loading, and thus often a triatic.

Some folk used triatic aerials, but thats not really load bearing

This is just thinking aloud!
Doesn't the triatic stay work like a backstay for the main, spreading the forward pressure on the mainmast through the mizzen shrouds as well as the main shrouds? Just picturing it, it seems to me that the triatic stay in combination with the mizzen shrouds would have a better mechanical advantage than the main shrouds alone. Of course, that presumes that the mizzen shrouds are sized to take the additional loading - the only ketch I know at all well has much lighter standing rigging on the mizzen than on the main, so it wouldn't work on her (a Westerly 31')

 

[zoidberg]

Hello, Brabs, and welcome.

You have a sound strong boat there, and you're doing fine spotting there may be a bit of minor adjustment needed..... so long as it's not the mast section itself that is bent. All else is quite minor.

There's good advice and pointers above. Some of it will sort you out, without stress. Of course, pics help - but nothing's better than an experienced owner of similar who can come take a look.

It's probably not serious - just some adjustment. I'm guessing it's not urgent.

 

[Sea-Fever]

If you look at my profile photo you may be able to see the angle at which the stays for the mizzen attach to the deck. They are not, in my humble opinion, positioned or specced to take load from the main mast. Also, they do not join the mizzen at the top, rather half way down so attaching anything that pulls the mizzen forward from top is likely to end in tears I would suggest. You may also be able to see where the main mast back stays attach to the deck, which presumably are man enough for the job….these hulls will take a substantial pounding I am told.

 

[Sea-Fever]

I should also add that the backstay for the mizzen attaches to the same point on the deck that the main mast back stays fixes to so what’s the point of a triatic stay in that circumstance?

 

[Bru]

We too own a W33 ketch and I'm happy to help. Lincolnshire isn't a million miles from us in not so sunny Northants so I could potentially be persuaded to come and spend a few hours helping to sort things out when the weather improves (usual fees apply ... I'm anybody's for a pint of beer )

No Westerly ketch left the factory with a triatic stay as standard. The rig as designed by Laurent Giles does not require one having a split backstay on the main and jumper stays on the mizzen

Can't really offer much in the way of useful advice online without more details and, as suggested, pics

 

[LadyInBed]

I am pretty sure the main sail and Head sail are not rigged correctly, there is no issue raising and lowering the Main sail, it is only when I look up at the top of the Mast, it certainly doesn’t look correct the way the rigging is running

I still can't understand why there is all this discussion about triatics!
The OP has made no mention of the mizzen, or that he has a triatic.

 

[penfold]

Fred drift.

I still can't understand why there is all this discussion about triatics!
The OP has made no mention of the mizzen, or that he has a triatic.

 

[oldmanofthehills]

Antarctic Pilot having mentioned triatics, caused Steve Yates to query the need for his apparely redundant one. It seem a profitable matter for discussion and sharing of knowledge.

To help Brabs more with original query we need pictures

 

[Bajansailor]

I posted this sail plan in post #8 - there is no triatic stay shown on it.

 

[Bru]

I still can't understand why there is all this discussion about triatics!

I blame Fred

As in Mr. Drift strikes again

It's a red herring as Westerly ketches don't have one as several owners thereof have pointed out! (Notwithstanding the somewhat surprising suggestion above that "lots" of Westerly ketches have one, I've never seen such an abomination)

Hopefully the OP will come back with more info and we can offer some genuine assistance

 

[oldmanofthehills]

I blame Fred

As in Mr. Drift strikes again

It's a red herring as Westerly ketches don't have one as several owners thereof have pointed out! (Notwithstanding the somewhat surprising suggestion above that "lots" of Westerly ketches have one, I've never seen such an abomination)

Hopefully the OP will come back with more info and we can offer some genuine assistance

I had seen one on a westerley and when sorting out the tangled rigging and raising mast of our newly aquired Pentland 12 years ago I did consider adding a triatic. Common sense prevailed, plus WAO data. The Forum however prompted me to determine when it would be useful, which turns out to be almost never for ketches

 

[steve yates]

I have been looking for them because mine had one, and I dont like the idea. Thats why I know quite a few have them Its been quite discouraging and makes me hesitate to get rid of mine.
Thanks to the thread drift here though, I am encouraged again to just do it. I know my boat was rerigged in its last couople of seasons sailing before I got it, but if the triatic was added then, (or even anytime before then) would there be any reason for the owners to change the original jumper stays?
Or to put it another way, if my mizzens spreaders angle forward of the mast, can I assume they are as originally designed and safely detach the triatic?

 

[Bru]

Or to put it another way, if my mizzens spreaders angle forward of the mast, can I assume they are as originally designed and safely detach the triatic?

I would have thought so but a) I'm not a rigger and b) I haven't seen what you've currently got so caveat bodger methinks

 

[steve yates]

Caveat Bodger, what a great phrase

 

[Laminar Flow]

I think you should find that your spreaders would be angled back to take the forward thrust of the sail and that the masthead would be supported forward by a stay over a strut or twin stays over a twin strut in a V on larger vessels.

 

[anoccasionalyachtsman]

I think you should find that your spreaders would be angled back to take the forward thrust of the sail and that the masthead would be supported forward by a stay over a strut or twin stays over a twin strut in a V on larger vessels.

His spreaders are angled forward to take the leech tension at the masthead.

 

[Laminar Flow]

His spreaders are angled forward to take the leech tension at the masthead.

Interesting, and what holds his masthead head back against the forward thrust of the sail? After all, unless he uses his mizzen for backing up in the marina, I would have thought having the vector pointing forward was the whole point of a sail.
The Diagram posted by Banjan, clearly shows the strut. Two lowers, back-angled spreaders on the upper, terminating at the aft lower chainplate and a strut at spreader height to maintain leach tension is how my mast stays up in a F8. Unless you have runners and a triatic, it is how pretty much how most stayed mizzens are held up.

 

[anoccasionalyachtsman]

Interesting, and what holds his masthead head back against the forward thrust of the sail? After all, unless he uses his mizzen for backing up in the marina, I would have thought having the vector pointing forward was the whole point of a sail.

From what I see in that drawing it's the aft pair of shrouds and the stiffness of the tube. As you often remind us, there's little thrust from the top of a sail anyway, there's no jib to compound the problem and a typically (for a Westerly) over-specified mast tube will do the job, and supporting the whole shebang fore and aft at about 60% height is a pragmatic solution.

The Diagram posted by Banjan, clearly shows the strut. Two lowers, back-angled spreaders on the upper, terminating at the aft lower chainplate and a strut at spreader height to maintain leach tension is how my mast stays up in a F8. Unless you have runners and a triatic, it is how pretty much how most stayed mizzens are held up.

You see a strut, but because it appears to come partly from the side of the mast I see it as the starboard one of two forward swept spreaders. Doesn't really matter though.

 

[Sea-Fever]

I’m amused by the fact that my profile picture, despite remaining unchanged for a couple of years, appears to feature the very topic of discussion in this thread, albeit not quite what the OP was asking about.

The photo was taken aboard my W33 ketch whilst I was up the mizzen fitting a new vhf antenna. The view shows the mizzen stays on the starboard side and where they attach to the deck. You can also see that they only reach halfway up the mast so Laminar Flow is correct in wondering what supports the top bit…. there is no stay in any direction at the top….it just relies on rigidity of the mast… the mizzen sail is quite small so the forces generated are not massive. I suppose you can think of the spreaders as merely adding to the rigidity of the mizzen mast as the bits of wire the spreaders push out start and end on the mast itself ….nowhere else!

 

[zoidberg]

I find myself wondering - not for the first time - what is the point of a ketch rig.

I've sailed a fair bit on two, and on neither was the mizzen sail used at all. Ever. Just wasn't worth the bother....