What is this cleat for?

[PEJ]

What is the reason for this tying up configuration? On the face of it you could just go straight form the boat cleat to the pontoon cleat. Why have the little secondary cleat?

This is not my boat, my boat has not got one of these. Should it have?

 

[sarabande]

I suggest the main cleat is for a for'd spring or a head rope, and the little open bollard type for a breast rope, though they can both be used for different purposes as may be most convenient.

One can never have too many well-secured cleats, it helps avoid a bad nip on boats with tumblehome or sharp toe rails.

 

[MapisM]

In stern-to mooring, you should route the bow line through the first cleat, which is actually meant to work as a fairlead, before securing the line at the "main" cleat.
When mooring alongside, the only benefit of routing the line as shown in the pic is that the attachment point is in a more forward position along the hull, but I don't think it makes any meaningful difference...

 

[jimmy_the_builder]

Yep, wot MapisM said, the forward cleat is actually a fairlead, not a cleat.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

only benefit of routing the line as shown in the pic is that the attachment point is in a more forward position along the hull, but I don't think it makes any meaningful difference...

Actually there is a small benefit to using the fairlead to attach the bow line to the pontoon because the line would be at a better angle to hold the boat. If the line was taken direct from the cleat to the pontoon, it would be at less of an angle and less capable of holding the boat. There would also be a small benefit when 'springing' the stern off the pontoon as routing the bow line through the fairlead would give more leverage.

 

[sailorman]

Actually there is a small benefit to using the fairlead to attach the bow line to the pontoon because the line would be at a better angle to hold the boat. If the line was taken direct from the cleat to the pontoon, it would be at less of an angle and less capable of holding the boat. There would also be a small benefit when 'springing' the stern off the pontoon as routing the bow line through the fairlead would give more leverage.

a stronger line of strain onto the cleat, the fixings are in shear not torsion

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

a stronger line of strain onto the cleat, the fixings are in shear not torsion

You'll have to explain that because to me, whether you route the line through the fairlead or direct from the cleat, both will be in shear. In any case, on this particular boat, the fairlead seems to be chunkier than cleat and it's fixed to a flat grp base whereas the cleat seems just to be bolted to the top of the toerail so for that reason, I'd rather route the line through the fairlead which is what it's designed for after all

 

[sailorman]

You'll have to explain that because to me, whether you route the line through the fairlead or direct from the cleat, both will be in shear. In any case, on this particular boat, the fairlead seems to be chunkier than cleat and it's fixed to a flat grp base whereas the cleat seems just to be bolted to the top of the toerail so for that reason, I'd rather route the line through the fairlead which is what it's designed for after all

the line loads are taken via the cleat base length, if that load was applied @ 180 deg the base is narrower & induces a bending moment

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

the line loads are taken via the cleat base length, if that load was applied @ 180 deg the base is narrower & induces a bending moment

Surely the load in both cases is resisted by the bolts fixing each item to the hull and of course the grp/timber reinforcing around the bolts transferring the loads to the hull?

 

[sailorman]

Surely the load in both cases is resisted by the bolts fixing each item to the hull and of course the grp/timber reinforcing around the bolts transferring the loads to the hull?

the cleat base will take loads of the rope to spread loadings via that base as well to help stop pitching of the cleat. to save costs some builders have eliminated the fairleads but the cleats & fixings are larger

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

the cleat base will take loads of the rope to spread loadings via that base as well to help stop pitching of the cleat. to save costs some builders have eliminated the fairleads but the cleats & fixings are larger

Yeah but any shear loading can only be transferred to the hull by the through bolts fixing the fairlead and cleat to the hull. The bases of the fairlead and cleat can only transfer compression loading to the hull unless the bases are glued to the hull which I'm fairly sure they're not

 

[MapisM]

the only benefit of routing the line as shown in the pic is that the attachment point is in a more forward position along the hull, but I don't think it makes any meaningful difference...

Actually there is a small benefit to using the fairlead to attach the bow line to the pontoon because the line would be at a better angle to hold the boat.

Agreed, the "geometry" of the lines is slightly better. That's what I had in mind when I said that there's a benefit in moving forward the holding point.
Otoh, I'm still skeptic that the difference can be worth bothering with.

Btw, I would guess that the also the difference in the bending moment is neither here nor there, between going straight to the cleat or through the fairlead.
Also because it wouldn't make any sense to have built a stronger base under the fairlead, compared to the cleat.
More than likely, the flat grp base which you noticed is because in that point the bow is rounded, thus requiring a minor adaptation of the mould to include a small flat surface as a base for the fairlead.

Actually, there's another reason why I'd rather avoid using the fairlead when the angle is as "closed" as in the above pic (as opposed to the almost straight pull which would happen with a stern to mooring), and it's that the rubbing effect of the line against the fairlead is much higher, and that can potentially wear the line in the long run.
On top of being more noisy...
...But we are now falling in the "hair splitting" category with this debate!

 

[sarabande]

Actually, there's another reason why I'd rather avoid using the fairlead when the angle is as "closed" as in the above pic (as opposed to the almost straight pull which would happen with a stern to mooring), and it's that the rubbing effect of the line against the fairlead is much higher, and that can potentially wear the line in the long run.

that's what I meant by a "bad nip" but you have explained it more elegantly

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Actually, there's another reason why I'd rather avoid using the fairlead when the angle is as "closed" as in the above pic (as opposed to the almost straight pull which would happen with a stern to mooring), and it's that the rubbing effect of the line against the fairlead is much higher, and that can potentially wear the line in the long run.
On top of being more noisy...
...But we are now falling in the "hair splitting" category with this debate!

Yup fair comment

 

[superheat6k]

I would agree with others it is a fairlead, but I noted it is more or less in line with the rope drum on the anchor windlass, which the cleat further back isn't. I don't know anyone who uses their rope drum, but the option would seem to be available to the OP.

 

[Jamesuk]

The fair lead is it strong enough to act as a cleat ? Looking at the photo if suggest yes but is the hull strong enough in a snatch load environment.

I bring this up as a conversation i had with a marina manager suggested cleats and the hull were strong but fairleads not so and would eventually fail suddenly eith or without obvious cracking.

 

[macnorton]

Agreed, the "geometry" of the lines is slightly better. That's what I had in mind when I said that there's a benefit in moving forward the holding point.
Otoh, I'm still skeptic that the difference can be worth bothering with.

Btw, I would guess that the also the difference in the bending moment is neither here nor there, between going straight to the cleat or through the fairlead.
Also because it wouldn't make any sense to have built a stronger base under the fairlead, compared to the cleat.
More than likely, the flat grp base which you noticed is because in that point the bow is rounded, thus requiring a minor adaptation of the mould to include a small flat surface as a base for the fairlead.

Actually, there's another reason why I'd rather avoid using the fairlead when the angle is as "closed" as in the above pic (as opposed to the almost straight pull which would happen with a stern to mooring), and it's that the rubbing effect of the line against the fairlead is much higher, and that can potentially wear the line in the long run.
On top of being more noisy...
...But we are now falling in the "hair splitting" category with this debate!

The weakest part of a line is the knot, could it be to keep the movement away from the knot? also using a fairlead spreads the load between two points. (I know "hair splitting")

 

[Mariner69]

The weakest part of a line is the knot, could it be to keep the movement away from the knot? also using a fairlead spreads the load between two points. (I know "hair splitting")

The 'knot' is an eye splice with a protective sleeve.

 

[macnorton]

The 'knot' is an eye splice with a protective sleeve.

It may be on this boat but people do use a conventional knot .

 

[MapisM]

It may be on this boat but people do use a conventional knot .

I'm not sure to see what your concern with knots is.
Let's forget the eye splice with the sleeve in this boat, which (elegant as it might appear) is the wrong technique for mooring, known as tying the dock to the boat, rather than the other way round.
The proper way of securing the line would be around the cleat, with zero knots, surely.
What sort of conventional knot do you think people should use?