Permanent Jackstays

[geem]

There are no scuff marks or damage. They just sit there doing nothing, until connected, then go where they need to go, rarely are they under tension. Mast work is with granny bars, foredeck work is usually on bum, against pull pit.

It may depend on how often you use the boat. We have worn our very expensive Awlgrip Griptex out on the deck after 3 years full time aboard. I can imagine wire jackstays making a mess of our hatches as they rub over them, as our webbing jackstays do. It really wouldn't work for us. Ditto dyneema guardwires. Ours wires get so much use, dyneema would wear out for fun. I worked out that a very enthusiastic sailer in the UK that uses their boat every weekend in the summer and for all their annual holiday would still take 5 years to use the boat in as much as we do in a year.

 

[RunAgroundHard]

It may depend on how often you use the boat. ……

I was thinking much the same, but one boat is a sail training yacht, side deck lines, on painted grip deck and there was no significant wear, seasonal use only, March to October. The deck got repainted every 5 years, and I don’t remember windscreen wiper type marks from wires. Other boat is Treadmaster deck over 15 years.

I would imagine movement is fairly limited, and in big seas, water lubricated, but that is just a guess.

The only point I wish to make, is that wire works, has done since I started sailing offshore late 70s, where it was fairly universal, and is still being used on some boats today. Of course tape works as well, but I prefer as much as fit and forget as possible, within reason.

 

[thinwater]

One boat, they run on side deck, and terminate on dedicated U bolts about 1.5 meter from bow or stern. They lay flat and touch edge of front of coach roof. These are not good because they run under Genoa and staysail sheets and a bit of a faff, but manageable.

On other boat they run on coach roof, anchored to cockpit cill, either side of liferaft, between mast and granny bar, terminate at inner forestay, Cockpit has jackstays as well. I use double tether safety lines on both boats. Like first boat a bit of a faff but manageable.

Looser jackstays outside everything would not be less of a faff. First boat they rest under T track edge, usually.

My last boat they were on the edge of the coach roof, which was very convenient. The very best place when it works. Because the genoa tracks were inboards of that and the shrouds were on the rail (catamaran), very little to work around and you don't walk on them.

On my trimaran they are on the inboard tramp lacing. Again, not a place you ever walk and outboard of the genoa unless it's Barberhauled out. Of course, it is crossed by Barberhauler lines. I need to think of a simple way to reroute them but so far nothing seems obvious. Mostly I can reach past the crossing before clipping if heading forward, which is one common use. That said, falling off a trimaran forward requires a distinct lack of attension (thee are big safety nets). More often, I use the tethers to access something on the leeward side that has come adrift or tangled. At speed, that area is wet and frequently swept by waves.

 

[thinwater]

... The only point I wish to make, is that wire works, has done since I started sailing offshore late 70s, where it was fairly universal, and is still being used on some boats today. Of course tape works as well, but I prefer as much as fit and forget as possible, within reason.

Though I have not used wire, his point here is sort of like the argument in favor of bare wire lifelines. I get it. I really get it for a training boat, where cuts are more likely to go unnoticed.

(I hope no one suggests coated wire for jacklines. For the record, World Sailing allows bare SS but not coated for jacklines, same as lifelines.)

 

[Iliade]

Something like this, in a thicker gauge, might be amusing. It would yield the benefits of wire but be less prone to rolling underfoot.

Flat Stainless Steel Braid 20mm2 (20mm wide x 4mm thick) – Copper Braid Products

Would probably cost an arm and a leg in the gauge preferred for the task, but maybe not...

Or how about stainless steel grab rails and runners that can 'walk' past the upstands.

 

[noelex]

An advantage of centreline jackstays that should be considered is that they are generally positioned where people do not walk. The loss of traction is not normally an issue.

This is unlike jackstays along the side deck which are often underfoot when going forward, just when the maximum traction is desirable.

 

[Zing]

Yes, UV damamge to climbing ropes is a relatively minor factor for most climbers, because other damage will happen first. Even heavy use would likely be no more than one summer season or maybe one year. But webbing slings left on anchors for multiple seasons are known to be seriously weakened. The are not trusted after one season and ONLY if the date is known.


See above. We're just going to disagree. This is firmly in my wheelhouse and I can see the conversation will just go in circles. The irony is that I am suggesting a safer alternative (Dyneema covered with webbing) than naked webbing. I didn't invent the idea, I am just relating it to the OP. There are many good answers and the World Sailing regs don't specify much. About the only things that are really bad is rope on deck and webbing in the sun for more than a year.

In fact, there is no such thing as permanent. An textile will have a lifespan, depending on over-strength. Stainless cable even has a lifespan, though other disadvantages have made it unpopular for jackstays (no stretch and too slippery).

Note that webbing has lost 35% of it's strength in 12 months, 45% in 24 months, and 55% after three years, assuming zero use. This is just hanging on a test rack. Assuming you step on them some and the wind moves them around, subtract another 10%. You are well into the danger zone at two years. Far worse than what I am suggesting.

I’ve seen test results like these. It’s a mistake in my view to believe them. I’ve got ropes with a safety factor of ten that have failed again and again in short time and barely seeing even that ten percent load. A little load with UV and ozone and oxygen kill ropes faster than we reckon with.

 

[zoidberg]

I’ve seen test results like these. It’s a mistake in my view to believe them. I’ve got ropes with a safety factor of ten that have failed again and again in short time and barely seeing even that ten percent load. A little load with UV and ozone and oxygen kill ropes faster than we reckon with.

Do tell us(me) more.

 

[Neeves]

I’ve seen test results like these. It’s a mistake in my view to believe them. I’ve got ropes with a safety factor of ten that have failed again and again in short time and barely seeing even that ten percent load. A little load with UV and ozone and oxygen kill ropes faster than we reckon with.

I don't hear of rope failure, halyards, sheets, jacklines as a result of sitting exposed to the environment here, nor anywhere else (you excepted). There are failures but usually as result of covers slipping in clutches, or focussed wear where a sheet rubs on a stainless lifeline (and Dyneema failing when used as a life line and worn by a sheet).

Jonathan

 

[thinwater]

I’ve seen test results like these. It’s a mistake in my view to believe them. I’ve got ropes with a safety factor of ten that have failed again and again in short time and barely seeing even that ten percent load. A little load with UV and ozone and oxygen kill ropes faster than we reckon with.

Yes, this is sort of like testing stainless steel either without chloride, or testing chloride corrosion without combining it with load cycling. Climbing ropes that are rappelled on a lot weaken significantly even without UV or loads over 2% BS; the fibers are stressed by the bending through the device as if the load were 5-10 times higher.

You can also look at fatigue plots. However, this is the effect without UV, external chafe, or the effect of grit on internal chafe. It also matters whether they were cycling to slack or some minimum taut load (slack is worse). Of course, load cycling on a jackline should be very low. On a halyard or topping lift, 10,000-100,000 plus is not hard to imagine. A topping lift may have a boom sliding back and forth constantly on windy days.

It's complicated. This is why inspection guides are always sort of vague or at least broad. I can't say I've ever been truly surprised by a failure. My climbing career would have been shorter.

 

[Neeves]

I'm not sure I'm, following the debate correctly but the exterior cover, of most cordage used in the marine industry, is exposed to UV, abrasion, degradation from grit etc. The core may be cycled but the cover will degrade long before the core is compromised - so the scheduled retirement strategy will be determined by the cover not the number of cycles of the overall.

You can assess the cover - its surprising difficult to inspect the core. Strip a manky cover off double braid and commonly the core will be not much different to a core of a new rope.

Degradation of the cover needs no great skill to identify - you just need to accept the hit to the wallet on a regular basis.

In over 40 years of sailing on our own and the yachts of others I have never had the core of a rope fail. I've had the cover fail, commonly in clutches, but not the core.

The exception has been 3 ply snubbers, but they don't have a cover.

Jonathan

 

[thinwater]

I'm not sure I'm, following the debate correctly but the exterior cover, of most cordage used in the marine industry, is exposed to UV, abrasion, degradation from grit etc. The core may be cycled but the cover will degrade long before the core is compromised - so the scheduled retirement strategy will be determined by the cover not the number of cycles of the overall.

You can assess the cover - its surprising difficult to inspect the core. Strip a manky cover off double braid and commonly the core will be not much different to a core of a new rope.

Degradation of the cover needs no great skill to identify - you just need to accept the hit to the wallet on a regular basis.

In over 40 years of sailing on our own and the yachts of others I have never had the core of a rope fail. I've had the cover fail, commonly in clutches, but not the core.

The exception has been 3 ply snubbers, but they don't have a cover.

Jonathan

The core of this sheet is completely separated but the cover is intact (but poor). My boat. It was a Kevlar core and flexing did the damamge.

I have also seen this happen with climbing ropes that had taken a hard fall while pinched in a crack. A sort of crushing injury. Rare, the cover usually strips first, but it is the reason you feel for lumps in the core when inspecting climbing ropes. I happened to one of my partner's ropes during a fall I witnessed.

I've seen snubbers with ruined cores but good covers when a chain was loaded over the snubber. Similar in cause to the climbing rope core damamge.

I have also tested the strength of weathered dock lines, core and cover separately, and the core is typically more degraded than you would think, even though it is not visible. Particularly noticeable with white ropes. UV damamge and chafe are mostly to the outside, but strain cycles, UV, and damamge from salt crystals are a problem in the core.

I'm pretty sure this varies with the application and the rope construction. It would make an interesting test series, but way too much work for me.

But mostly checking the cover for UV and chafe will do. Historically, many polyester ropes were sized for stretch not strength (halyards for example) and so they were monstrously over strength.

 

[Neeves]

The core of this sheet is completely separated but the cover is intact (but poor). My boat. It was a Kevlar core and flexing did the damamge.

I have also seen this happen with climbing ropes that had taken a hard fall while pinched in a crack. A sort of crushing injury. Rare, the cover usually strips first, but it is the reason you feel for lumps in the core when inspecting climbing ropes. I happened to one of my partner's ropes during a fall I witnessed.

I've seen snubbers with ruined cores but good covers when a chain was loaded over the snubber. Similar in cause to the climbing rope core damamge.

I have also tested the strength of weathered dock lines, core and cover separately, and the core is typically more degraded than you would think, even though it is not visible. Particularly noticeable with white ropes. UV damamge and chafe are mostly to the outside, but strain cycles, UV, and damamge from salt crystals are a problem in the core.

I'm pretty sure this varies with the application and the rope construction. It would make an interesting test series, but way too much work for me.

But mostly checking the cover for UV and chafe will do. Historically, many polyester ropes were sized for stretch not strength (halyards for example) and so they were monstrously over strength.

From memory - which is unreliable - I thought that Kevlar was prone to UV and Dyneema UV (more?)_ resistant.

Jonathan

 

[zoidberg]

From memory - which is unreliable - I thought that Kevlar was prone to UV and Dyneema UV (more?)_ resistant.

....Which could be an argument for prefering Marlow D12 over Marlow V12, where the characteristics were otherwise similar.

 

[thinwater]

From memory - which is unreliable - I thought that Kevlar was prone to UV and Dyneema UV (more?)_ resistant.

Jonathan

Yup. Kevlar is VERY vulnerable to UV and does not like repeated flexing. Not a good choice for this application, but Dyneema was not common then and it was the PO the chose it. The only real advantage of Kevlar is no creep, which doesn't matter for a sheet. Also heat resistance; firefighters use it for escape ropes, since it won't melt.

 

[Zing]

Do tell us(me) more.

And in addition to the points I mentioned Thinwater mentioned point load damage, stress from tight bend loads around blocks and cyclic load damage. All relevant. A massive safety factor and early replacement as a preventative maintenance strategy is a good thing.

Learnt the hard way.