Date
1 - 10 of 10
Downwind Sailing
|
Hi, again, all,
I've got a ? about what you do on very broad reaches and downwind when you only have a few hours of sailing on that angle. It seems I've done very little downwind work with "Kristy" until now, so am just discovering some things I haven't encountered until now. When I'm on a very broad reach,the mainsail rests on the aft shrouds of the main mast. Same true if I'm running downwind. I'm noticing a discoloration of the main where it rests on the shroud, and don't want to damage my sail. In a 15+ kt wind I can make fair progress with main and mizzen wing on wing, but was wondering if you use one of the downwind poles to hold out the Jenny? Seems like I read somewhere that you shouldn't use one pole only, but can't find it now and can't think of a good reason not to. Using both poles and the double headsail rig seems like a lot of work to sail for just a few hours. So my questions are: Do you worry about the main resting on the shroud when going downwind? What do you do when your destination is directly downwind for 5-6 hrs of sailing? Do you sail on a broad reach and jibe, or pole out the Jenny, or something else? Sounds pretty elementary, I know...but then I'm still in Elementary School. Thanks, Kent "Kristy" SM243 |
|
|
|
svbebe <yahoogroups@...>
Can't say what others do, but we never let the mainsail touch the shroud. Sails are too expensive to risk damage and it seems that the shroud would wear on the sail. If it is anticipated to be only a half-day run dead downwind, we normally just pole out the jenny and put the mizzen to the opposite side with a preventer, taking care to also keep the mizzen sail off the shroud. We leave the main furled because it just isn't possible to get the main far enough out with the wind directly astern. If winds are very light, we pole out our asymmetrical (not a standard Amel sail). The asymmetrical is not designed for dead downwind, but it works fine with the pole and stays filled better than the heavier genoa because it is such a light material.
For downwind sailing we use just one pole probably 80 to 90% of the time. After you get used to it, rigging the pole is very easy for 2 people. You will probably get several different answers on this question. Judy S/V BeBe SM2 #387 |
|
|
|
Hi Kent,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Totally agree with Judy (about avoiding having the main riding on the aft lowers). Here's how we play it: we pole out the jib at just a bit deeper than a beam reach, say ~ 110 apparent and keep the main and mizzen full(usually fly the foc d'artimon, too). As we go deeper to where the main starts to ride on the shrouds, we partially furl it, since it begins to block the jib anyway - it's surprising how effective it remains and stays off the shrouds. Lot's of vang and outhaul tension, although not perfect for trim, keeps the sail off the shrouds longer. At DDW we usually furl the main completely in a breeze and sometimes overtrim the mizzen to dampen any roll (using it as a horizontal stabilizer, you might say). In light air we'll go wing 'n wing with the main, but keep it overtrimmed and off the shrouds. I usually keep both poles rigged, so if we going to be out for a couple of hours I'll pop the balloner and totally furl the main and mizzen. Fair winds, Craig & Katherine, Santorin #68 --- In amelyachtowners@..., "svbebe" <yahoogroups@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
sy.ashia <sy.ashia@...>
Hallo Kent,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
when we are downwind sailing we have some different sails we can use. 1- We have a Gennaker, which is furled on a endless gennaker furler with the spinnaker haleyard. You need about 10-20 min to get it rised from the scratch. If it is set on the furler, you just have to draw the right line. Additional if you want, you can furl the genua on the other side and use both front sails. If you have finished the downwind course you just need to furl the gennaker in, thats all. 2- For longer downwind courses (more than 2-3 h) we use a Parasailor, which is set on the spinnaker haleyard too and uses a socket. We sail it without the poles, just with 4 sheets ( 2 left, 2 right, 2 back, 2 front). I need about 20-30 min. to get everything ready. If we have less than 16 kt wind, we use additional the mizzen balloner. To take the Parasailor down is relatively easy, just pull the socket down and take everything into the front locker. 3- An alternativ is a "flying" passat sail, which is furled on the gennaker furler. Until now, we used it only together with both poles. It has about 200m² and lets the SM2000 fly, better I should say it is like carried on a rail, just straight ahead and nearly no work for the autopilot. A lot better than the Parasailor. If you want to finish the downwind course, you just furl the passat sail in and you can immediately use the genua, without the problems of getting down the ballooner from the front stay. When we have the next time an occasion to do, we will try to use this sail without the poles. I think it shout work too. If you want to see some photos of 2- and 3-, look at the photo selection at "ASHIA / ARC2009". Greetings Armin SY ASHIA, SM2000, #357 p.s. our passat sail has some special holes at the front for better stability, I think it works very well. --- In amelyachtowners@..., "Kent Robertson" <karkauai@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Dave_Benjamin
Kent,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
We use the twin poles for downwind sailing. We pole the genoa to one side and use the spin halyard to raise one of the balooners in the other groove. When we cross the Pacific we'll likely have both nylon sails on the furler. I would like to build another headsail that can be flown from a Spectra stay and we'll just use soft hanks on the sail. Works on VOR 70's so it should be easy enough. Twins are kind of "old school" but they work really well downwind and on deep angles. For reaching an assym on a Colligo furler would be nice. Try to keep the main off the rigging, especially if you have full battens, unless you like to support sailmakers (not all bad from my perspective;-) Downwind you can try the twins without the main or just leave it up reefed. I like to try and not disturb the flow of air to the twins. For short downwind trips you can pole out the genoa opposite the main and run wing on wing. I'm not sure about the caveat you heard about using one pole by itself. Maybe there is some concern about side loading the mast???? I can't think of a reason to limit use of a single reaching strut/pole combo but maybe there is something I'm missing. Maybe you could check with the factory or Joel Potter? --- In amelyachtowners@..., "Kent Robertson" <karkauai@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Hi, again, Amel brothers and sisters.
New ? about the downwind rig. After replacing my standing rigging I replaced the supports on the shrouds that support the jockey poles. When they seem to fit perfectly on the shrouds, the ring that the pole goes through looks too low by about 6 inches. If I raise the support (by the way, what do we call these supports?) enough to be straight out from the socket in the mast, it looks like it would pull the shrouds together. Does it give some or should I just try to raise it at the outer shrouds? I think I am right in assuming that the jockey pole should be parallel to the water line??? Thanks again in advance for your advice. Kent SM243 KRISTY |
|
|
|
Dave_Benjamin
For deep downwind we often drop the main and just let the twins do their thing. We carry a roll of self adhesive insignia cloth so we can create sacrificial patches in the event we notice chafe in any of the sails. So far the biggest issue we have is the main has picked up some damage while flaked due to the non-skid on the top of the dodger.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In amelyachtowners@..., "svbebe" <yahoogroups@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Judy and Bill aboard SV BeBe <yahoogroups@...>
Kent,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Regarding the shroud support ring that the short pole goes through in the rigging, the center of this ring is about 77" from the top of the rail. The rigging has not been removed on BeBe. Yes, the short pole is slightly lower at the shroud side than the mast side (didn't measure). Hope this helps. Bill s/v BeBe, SM2k, #387 Currently Malasia/Thailand area Blog: http://www.svbebe.com --- In amelyachtowners@..., "Kent Robertson" <karkauai@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
amelliahona <no_reply@...>
Hi Kent:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
We have always called this support the "boomerang". I have never paid much attention to this angle before but I have a photo that I will post that is taken from dead ahead of my boat and I can see from that photo that the boomerang is about 6 inches lower (estimating) than the receptacle on the mast. I will post the photo in "Rigging Super Maramu" Gary Amel SM #335 --- In amelyachtowners@..., "Kent Robertson" <karkauai@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Hi Kent,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
The Jockey Poles most definitely should not be parallel to the water. If you look closely at the stubby cylindrical socket with the retaining pin that's welded onto the mast and into which your jockey pole goes, you'll see that it is angled slightly downward. The Jockey Pole must be aligned with that socket and, therefore, will take that same slight downward angle from the mast to the "boomerang" (which seems a good name for the support rail and ring assembly clamped to the shrouds). You can easily visually judge when the Jockey Pole is "square" with the socket (not the mast) and that defines the right height that the "boomerang" needs to be. The Jockey Pole most definitely won't be "parallel to the water line" nor "straight out from the mast" - it will be perfectly in-line with it's socket and, thus, will angle slightly down as it goes out to the shrouds. The "boomerang" should fit nicely at this height - whack it around a bit with your fist at the front and back until it "settles in". The upper shroud and the intermediate may have to be spread apart just a bit to get the "U" bolts on (you should tension the rig before clamping down the "Boomerang"). Cheers, Craig Briggs, s/v Sangaris in Greece, Santorin #68 --- In amelyachtowners@..., "Kent Robertson" <karkauai@...> wrote:
|
|
|