why do we still have standing rigging?

[Seajet]

The loads on an unstayed carbon fibre mast, - imagine a spinnaker pulling on it - are horrible, and what might be some graduate designers' wizard idea brand new might not be so spiffing 20 years later with all the accumulated stresses!

Freedom boats seem to have disappeared while conventional rigs are still around, there's a reason for that, and PRV Pete makes a good point that shrouds etc are handy when moving about on deck.

I'm confident to add bits like blocks and eyes on alloy masts, but having experience of carbon fibre aircraft wings ( Harrier II GR5 ) I'd be very wary of masts made from this nasty, brittle stuff !

 

[NormanS]

With internal halyards etc, it's notoriously difficult to prevent water getting down and into the boat, with a keel stepped mast.

 

[Seajet]

With internal halyards etc, it's notoriously difficult to prevent water getting down and into the boat, with a keel stepped mast.

Very true.

On my Carter 30 with a keel stepped mast the designer Dick Carters' answer was to put the foot of the mast in the shower tray, later when I had the boat I added an auto bilge pump for peace of mind.

That thing actually caused me extra worry, as the ( Rule ) float valve regularly stuck so I worried about whether the bilges were pumped out, the battery was flat or the thing had caused a fire !

The amount of water coming through the mast apertures was just a minor annoyance though, not a sinking sort of worry as long as I visited her every couple of weeks.


On my present boat I'm fitting a Whale supersub 1100 pump with an integral sensor, I've heard good things about these, and in the 21st Century while we're not strolling around in silver suits and taking one pill a day for meals like in 'UFO / Thunderbirds ' I'd like to think we can get basic 12 volt pumps to work !

 

[john_morris_uk]

With respect its a silly question.

We still build suspension bridges with wires holding the main carriageway up. etc etc.

Standing rigging happens to be a convenient way of not only holding a mast up but helping determine its shape under load.

Arguably its also cheaper than the alternatives.

What's the problem?

 

[tudorsailor]

With respect its a silly question.

We still build suspension bridges with wires holding the main carriageway up. etc etc.

Standing rigging happens to be a convenient way of not only holding a mast up but helping determine its shape under load.

Arguably its also cheaper than the alternatives.

What's the problem?

I think that rigging made from Dyneema might be cheaper than wire according to Colligo Marine, so instead of no standing rigging, use dyneema

TS

 

[Skylark]

With respect its a silly question.

We still build suspension bridges with wires holding the main carriageway up. etc etc.

Standing rigging happens to be a convenient way of not only holding a mast up but helping determine its shape under load.

Arguably its also cheaper than the alternatives.

What's the problem?

Phew! Glad to read your post, John. I've just instructed the rigger to replace my standing rigging (2001 Bene) and the mast has been removed today.

 

[westernman]

I think that rigging made from Dyneema might be cheaper than wire according to Colligo Marine, so instead of no standing rigging, use dyneema

TS

Wire wears much better than string when subject to chafing.

 

[interloper]

Freedom Yachts built boats with unstayed masts back in the 1970s. Some models even carried head sails:

As another forum member noted above, Tom Wylie is still building a range of yachts with unstayed masts < http://www.wyliecat.com/index.html >.

 

[Rossynant]

why do we still have standing rigging?
Planes no longer have wires to hold the wings on. Masts can be made out of carbon epoxy poles.

Another way to put it: why do we still have unstayed masts? Both were with us for ages. Had few boats, albeit small, with simple pole mast of spruce or alu, who needs carbon?
Planes usually go at small angle, as boat upwind. Now boat with no foresail has very inefficient leading edge compared to airplane, more so on thick self-standing stick... Though knowing efficiently made catboat (wrapped sail) I think lack of rigging made her equal. Still big problem though: where to hang extra sail, especially downwind?
Not to mention mast bending - or whipping wildly about when boat rolls downwind. And downwind shrouds do not give drag.

 

[grumpy_o_g]

An aerofoil on an aircraft has (with the exception of slats and flaps) a fixed shape and can be designed to operate very efficiently but in a very narrow envelope. Because of the rigid skin/skeleton the main spar can sit well aft of the leading edge pretty much on the centre of pressure where it's needed and still allow a very good shape. But aircraft (except for fighters and aerobatic a/c - which have big engines and control surfaces) don't have to do the equivalent of broad reach nor reduce the wing area because the airspeed is too high. Net result is that cloth is still far and away the best compromise for the aerofoil on a sailing boat.

If you don't have any stays on the spar you end up with an aerofoil that has to have a thick spar on the leading edge, which isn't optimal for a smooth airflow over the sail. You have no real way of controlling the shape of the sail beyond the mainsheet and you have to build the yacht around the keel-stepped mast but also allow for sideways forces on the cabin top as well as the usual compression.

I'm sure that resistance to change plays a part but I don't think there's any significant advantage to be gained for the majority of boats in getting rid of the standing rigging. Most boats with unstayed masts seem to be either nothing spectacular in the performance stakes or an extreme design that isn't really suited to the type of sailing most of us do (or are capable of doing) and I think that sums up where they'll stay for a while yet.

 

[john_morris_uk]

I think that rigging made from Dyneema might be cheaper than wire according to Colligo Marine, so instead of no standing rigging, use dyneema

TS

I was also referring to the cost of the stiffer mast and all the strengthening of the hull to support the mast without standing rigging.

Its an interesting thought about Dyneema being cheaper but the last time I replaced our standing rigging, an appreciable part of the cost was all the end fittings and swaging. I don 't know what you would terminate Dyneema standing rigging with? Knots would lose strength of the line to some degree. I suspect that the size dyneema you would need would produce unacceptable windage?

 

[chrisedwards]

"strengthening the hull" - I've had ten yachts with free standing masts - all designed to take bermudan. None had any significant strengthening and some - Kingfishers 20's had none. Turn your argument on its head - I've known people to convert to free standing masts to stop the monumental forces imposed by standing rigging from damaging their boats.

I was also referring to the cost of the stiffer mast and all the strengthening of the hull to support the mast without standing rigging.

Its an interesting thought about Dyneema being cheaper but the last time I replaced our standing rigging, an appreciable part of the cost was all the end fittings and swaging. I don 't know what you would terminate Dyneema standing rigging with? Knots would lose strength of the line to some degree. I suspect that the size dyneema you would need would produce unacceptable windage?

 

[john_morris_uk]

With respect, that doesn't really make sense.

If you are suggesting you can just put a free standing mast into a boat that was designed for a stayed mast then somewhere the boat designer has got his/her calculations wrong. Leaving aside the fact that many (most) modern boats are designed for deck stepped masts, and assuming you are just slotting this new free standing mast into the hole where the keel stepped mast went, then not looking carefully at the loads on the deck/cabin top and its surrounding structures is madness.

Any decently designed boat has the loads (compression and lateral) on the mast and the loads on the shrouds and rigging carefully calculated.

Furthermore if the rigging is stressing the boat there was something wrong with the design in the first place and changing to a non stayed mast might compound the problem and not mitigate against it. I can't imagine any surveyor worth his/her salt passing such a scheme as fit for sea...

The only alternative answer is that the hull/cabin was severely over engineered in the first place.

"strengthening the hull" - I've had ten yachts with free standing masts - all designed to take bermudan. None had any significant strengthening and some - Kingfishers 20's had none. Turn your argument on its head - I've known people to convert to free standing masts to stop the monumental forces imposed by standing rigging from damaging their boats.

 

[chrisedwards]

You are right in my experience - my boats were well enough made in the first place to simply slot free standing masts in - just have a look. So strengthening may not be an issue. To my astonishment - my present Freedom - which is designed for freestanding masts - there is no reinforcing whatsover - just normal thickness deck, no stiffeners, for at least a metre from the mast. The forces imposed by bermudan make a mockery of those imposed by freestanding.

Freestanding masts:

far less expense associated with standing rigging

far less likely to break - think of all those components which may fail - scores - on your standing rigging

much less windage

no infuriating and scary wind scream in the wires

no tuning adjustment...

far less maintenance - crosstree / sockets /chainplates/ Ubolts....etc....etc and associated worry

Far more aesthetically pleasing unless you judge beauty in same way as Nelson

I could go on

With respect, that doesn't really make sense.

If you are suggesting you can just put a free standing mast into a boat that was designed for a stayed mast then somewhere the boat designer has got his/her calculations wrong. Leaving aside the fact that many (most) modern boats are designed for deck stepped masts, and assuming you are just slotting this new free standing mast into the hole where the keel stepped mast went, then not looking carefully at the loads on the deck/cabin top and its surrounding structures is madness.

Any decently designed boat has the loads (compression and lateral) on the mast and the loads on the shrouds and rigging carefully calculated.

Furthermore if the rigging is stressing the boat there was something wrong with the design in the first place and changing to a non stayed mast might compound the problem and not mitigate against it. I can't imagine any surveyor worth his/her salt passing such a scheme as fit for sea...

The only alternative answer is that the hull/cabin was severely over engineered in the first place.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Well you certainly seem to be convinced!

Each to their own. Lack of tuning is a two edged sword and as I am neither scared by the sound of the wind in the rigging nor worried about my chain plates any more than I would be worried about an unstayed mast we will have to agree to differ.

Freedom rigs and unstayed masts have their place (I've been on the boat with the biggest freedom rig in the world) but if the rig was as good as some would say more yachts would have them...

You are right in my experience - my boats were well enough made in the first place to simply slot free standing masts in - just have a look. So strengthening may not be an issue. To my astonishment - my present Freedom - which is designed for freestanding masts - there is no reinforcing whatsover - just normal thickness deck, no stiffeners, for at least a metre from the mast. The forces imposed by bermudan make a mockery of those imposed by freestanding.

Freestanding masts:

far less expense associated with standing rigging

far less likely to break - think of all those components which may fail - scores - on your standing rigging

much less windage

no infuriating and scary wind scream in the wires

no tuning adjustment...

far less maintenance - crosstree / sockets /chainplates/ Ubolts....etc....etc and associated worry

Far more aesthetically pleasing unless you judge beauty in same way as Nelson

I could go on

 

[haydude]

I think that it is because aircrafts can do with proportionally smaller wing/sail area since they compensate the loss of lift at low speed with more speed. Sailboats cannot afford to loose in sail area. In addition there is higher cost. Only those buying superyachts can afford it in which case the lack of standing rigging allows for innovative sail shapes, look at the Maltese Falcon as an example.

 

[westernman]

I think that it is because aircrafts can do with proportionally smaller wing/sail area since they compensate the loss of lift at low speed with more speed. Sailboats cannot afford to loose in sail area. In addition there is higher cost. Only those buying superyachts can afford it in which case the lack of standing rigging allows for innovative sail shapes, look at the Maltese Falcon as an example.

The sail shape on Maltese Falcon is not great for going to windward. The widest chord is in the wrong place, and depending on conditions the sail is either too flat or much too full and cannot be adjusted satisfactorily.

 

[chrisedwards]

Thats it - standing rigging allows you to have a tight luff wire - in many cases - so important for windward work.

The sail shape on Maltese Falcon is not great for going to windward. The widest chord is in the wrong place, and depending on conditions the sail is either too flat or much too full and cannot be adjusted satisfactorily.

 

[Blueboatman]

For cruising I think Chris Edwards has listed most of the well accepted advantages...
Here's a couple more.. Gybing less stressful, less slam imparted into the structure

A tapered mast feathers off in gusts, which can be a good thing as opposed to flattening everything hard hard in with a stayed equivalent.. Not always but hey...

And , my favourite.. No bloody shrouds to chafe the main against..

Corribee ( my experience) the unstayed mast when redesigned came through the forehatch ( or was encouraged to by elongating the rudder Skeg too) so structurally a very easy one.
And I climbed it too, boat never capsized nor snapped off...

And ( ok bit of a smartarise here) I rigged a forsa with a rigid forestay that precluded putting the freestanding mast in compression... Anything can be done, it just takes a bit of ingenuity and lateral thinking..

But for banging upwind against the trades( who really really does much of that eh?), posh fore sails and big diesels are the way to go ( quicker).

 

[Seajet]

For cruising I think Chris Edwards has listed most of the well accepted advantages...
Here's a couple more.. Gybing less stressful, less slam imparted into the structure

A tapered mast feathers off in gusts, which can be a good thing as opposed to flattening everything hard hard in with a stayed equivalent.. Not always but hey...

And , my favourite.. No bloody shrouds to chafe the main against..

Corribee ( my experience) the unstayed mast when redesigned came through the forehatch ( or was encouraged to by elongating the rudder Skeg too) so structurally a very easy one.
And I climbed it too, boat never capsized nor snapped off...

And ( ok bit of a smartarise here) I rigged a forsa with a rigid forestay that precluded putting the freestanding mast in compression... Anything can be done, it just takes a bit of ingenuity and lateral thinking..

But for banging upwind against the trades( who really really does much of that eh?), posh fore sails and big diesels are the way to go ( quicker).

And I thought I was confused before !

Standing rigging and a mast with a chance of staying perpendicular to the boat, ta very much.