Rigging a Third Reef

[Aja]

Re: Pinching

Jimi

I have to sit on my hands/bite my tongue/go for a walk round the deck

Grabbing the tiller from Sheena is not an option!!!!

Donald

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Re: Pinching

Yup tried all that, but its a bit like being an teenager .. all over the place .. seriously though I think the very slight weather helm when stompin in the groove leads people to helm a bit high

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[dickh]

I have all 3 reef lines rigged permanently and I wouldn't do it any other way. I do have the advantage that I fitted a new boom & gooseneck about 4 years ago and deliberately went for the next size up to get the 3 reefs and the outhaul in the boom.
The main halliard leads to the cockpit, with it marked at the correct place just before the clutch so I lower the halliard the correct amount.
The Kicker is spring loaded so as soon as I let the kicker off from the cockpit the boom raises.
I then go to the mast and hook the cringle over the ramshorn, AND loop a length of shock cord OVER the horn so the cringle cannot get blown off. This works very well, the (two) pieces of shock cord are permanently fitted and normally are hooked over the horns.
I then return to the cockpit, sweat up the halliard, pull in the leech cringle, pull in the kicker, pull in the mainsheet and away we go.
It all works very well.
On reflection I would go next time with the smaller boom and tie off the outhaul permanently and use the 3 lines for reefs only.
I have to go to the mast as after the first reef I have to let the sail slides out of the groove as on my boat the slot to remove them is about 12" above the gooseneck!
I am seriously thinking about fitting 'spectacles though as they sound a good idea. I have no need for cunninghams/flatteners as my mainsail is fully battened and is cut fairly flat.
On other boats I've had 2 reefs internally and the 3rd reef external, which might not look very nice but works fine.

<hr width=100% size=1>dickh
I'd rather be sailing... /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[penfold]

I wouldn't recommend this; dropping the main completely means that the mast is only restrained by the backstay(unless you have runners). In big seas this will allow the mast to 'pant' or flex forwards. This bending has resulted in boats being dismasted. Quite apart from the danger of dismasting, the flexing drastically shortens the fatigue life of your mast. If you haven't got a storm trysail you really should leave the main up with three reefs and either drop the fore sail or put up a storm jib.

cheers
david b

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tcm]

Re: harhar - other helms

I'm afraid that i wrote up a bit of our boaty trip up the needles channel and details of the scaredy cowardly navigator can be found under "blowing in the wind" in sept issue of MBY. Sorry bout that. However, the subeditor made it all very nice and pleasant (ish).

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

Re: I don\'t get it

I am going on something I read on the (British) Hunter website which I've just looked at again...

"The Ranger 245, Channel 27 and Pilot 27 all make an easy Category B.  Many boats only manage Category C!  Indeed the AVS for these Hunters is well up to Category A levels but the overall length factor makes it impossible for them to be Category A."

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[Aeolus_IV]

Re: Pinching

I can be heard muttering "don't pinch ... don't pinch ..." all the way up the windward leg of every race, but to myself, nobody else! After all these years of racing I still have to watch the tell-tails like a hawk.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Mmm, had'nt thought of that. But can't see how a scrap of triple reefed main will change that situation much, or am I missing something?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[andy_wilson]

Basically can't be ar53d to enlarge the slot in the deck spray rail and etc. I've done the refit now and more interested in sailing.

Whilst I appreciate it could happen, in UK waters I have never gone from wind so light the outhaul has an effect, to needing the third reef (or the otherway for that matter) on the same passage.

I ignor the passing of a front as you know this is the lull between the blow anyway.

In all other cases either the barometer has started to take a dive or the view over the weather rail has looked decidedly iffy to indicate what is comming.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Re: harhar - other helms

Oohh ... has Sailbad issued writs yet?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[coco]

Re: I don\'t get it

I agree this is all a bit funny. I checked on the Nortshore website and it says "The yacht is built to conform to CE Category A" for the 28. There is another example with the First 211 (21 ft.) which is in cat. B, whereas the Etap 21 is in cat. C.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tcm]

Re: harhar - other helms

oo heck i forgot he was a bit legalified.

Still, i reckon i am in the clear cos it doesn't mention him by name, it just make references to crew crapping themselves which is sort of ambiguous. Well, I mean it would be ambiguous except for the pic of your boat and the caption "Raggies: they're full of shit aren't they?" and the rest of the article being all about how easy peasy sailing is in practice, unless you are ratarsed after a skinful of lager/rum/whisky. Oh and I also put in how you had a road atlas. But I think you come out of it quite well, really.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

Articel@POW 2morrow? nm

`

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[Twister_Ken]

Weasel words

Strictly speaking, "being built to conform to, etc" doesn't actually mean that it is certified as such. I shall ask Northshore at SBS.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[Twister_Ken]

mast pants

I'm also in the 'hadn't thought of that camp', but thinking it through, with any sort of mainsail up and sweated-in for beating, tension is being put into the rig through the main halyard, the kicker, the mainsheet and the tension running down the leech. I'm not enough of an engineer (in fact, I'm not an engineer at all) to know how much that will help matters, and it would seem to count for not very much at all when you come off the wind.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[MainlySteam]

Re: mast pants

Think I would agree with you on that but probably partly dependant on the rig, perhaps more so if it is fractional (but in that case one would have runners and/or swept back spreaders anyway). Also on the longitudinal rigidity of the hull as sagging when the bow comes down obviously loosens the rig fore and aft allowing it to pant. I think if it was a problem on ones own boat it would be observable.

Certainly not a problem for us as we have a pair of lower shrouds each side and runners as well (but never felt a need to use the runners when nothing set on the inner forestay and not really then either).

However, another boat I know with a tall masthead rig, its rig pants in the steep seas here even with the mainsail up and runners. Also, if you have seen any video of the bad Sydney-Hobart race, you can see the masts panting heavily (I accept in bad conditions) even with tri or reefed main set. In fact in some video it shows an about 50-60 foot yacht come off a big swell and you can see the forestay and storm jib sag right away - bit like Team NZ really, except the rig stayed up!

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[tcm]

Re: Articel@POW 2morrow? nm

yup. I've got another one in the pipeline about a bunch of nerks jamming ch16.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[coco]

Re: Weasel words

I would be interested to know the answer.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jzaat]

Re: mast pants

Actually I think that a deeply reefed main only aggravates the situation.
The mast is subjected to compression loads by head and back stay and will jump at any opportunity to go out of column. The main force applied by a mainsail is acting through the leech, having that pull at about halfway down the mast (2nd, 3rd reef) will give fairly easy option for the mast to bend out and start pumping/panting.
It can be quite revealing to have a walk up to the mast when thrashing to windward in big seas and high winds, gives a much better overall picture than from the cockpit...

Jeroen

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[coco]

Re: mast pants

I would say that it depends very much what kind of rig you do have. Modern rigs with angled spreaders probably do benefit from a reefed mainsail. The tension on the reefed main leech has a stabilizing effect on the mast which is always pushed forward by the forces on the lower shrouds. I lost such a rig when, in a blow, I had the bad idea to sail on a small jib only. The pumping action on the middle of the mast destroyed it.

This is not the case for traditional masthead rigs with symetrical fore and aft lower shrouds. For this kind of rig, a reefed mainsail tends to bend the middle of the mast backwards. In this case, the obvious solution is to have a lower headstay with runners (a cutter rig is perfect).

<hr width=100% size=1>