hi all, I have just been admiring Marno’s web site and all the wonderful photos and stories so well presented, when I noticed all the gadgetry attached to the pushpit. GPS antenna, davits, flag staff and so forth. The mizzen sheet track seems to be on the same place as on my boat, but on my boat anything protruding above the rails will be gone after the first jibe. Even the helmsman’s head is not safe! The po commented that they lost more than one danbouy this way. Even the outboard bracket is prone to getting the sheet wrapped around it so the outboard is always kept below when sailing. Marno must have a good set up to protect this gear, I would love to know how he does it.
I’ve been wrestling with the same problem on the F44. The mizzen track is on top of the transom and the boom protrudes even more aft. On Marno’s site you can see that the davits are mounted just outside the track on top of the transom. An other solution as seen on F44 Airborne is mounting the davits not on top of the transom, but against the transom. For a flagstick holder this works equally well. I’ve been toying with the idea of doing away with the tracks altogether and using two deadeyes at the end points of the tracks. For the forward sail this is better than a track; the track seduces you to sheet in the forward sail on the catketch or -schooner way too far in because the track makes you forget is is actually a genoa on a stick. If you look at the modern rig of the Wyliecat, you find they don’t use tracks. If it wasn’t for a whole bunch of holes in the deck and transom, I’d done away already with the tracks. Nothing beats simplicity, right!
I’m confused about the track being a “seduction” (to sheet in too far). My rig has no tracks (main or mizzen). The mizzen sheets to a padeye on the end of the boomkin (which is forever getting the sheet/block wrapped around it any time the sheet is not carefully controlled in a tack (or gybe!). I’m fiddling with something to hold the turning block upright to limit this (maybe a split piece of white hose & cable ties).
The main is sheeted to a padeye on the centerline of the deck…talk about something to seduce you into oversheeting the main! I’ve been contemplating installing a track simply so I can get the boom to stay down WITHOUT oversheeting toward the centerline (by dropping the car to the leeward end of the track).
I’m thinking maybe that the F40 Cat Ketches which were originally shipped with “standard booms” had a track installed for the main (mine were a factory retrofit, but the PO only shipped the masts back to Rhode Island, not the whole boat.)
I tend to think of my main as more of a “blade jib” on a stick (with a heck of a roach), however, since I’ve never seen a genoa that didn’t have overlap.
John,
I see your point. A single padeye indeed challenges you even more to sheet in too far. I was referring to the Wyliecat sheeting arrangement with two padeyes placed just inside the sidedecks or on the edges of the coachroof.
Like this:
Judging by their performance in races, I daresay the Wyliecats have the most advanced implementation of the cat(-ketch) rig.
About your mizzen: would it be possible to retrofit a spring under the block? I have Shaefer footblocks with springs on main and mizzen and I know these springs break over time and can be replaced.
I haven’t seen a spring-loaded, stand-up block that I felt would make an adequate replacement (size or strengthwise) for the block, shackle and (large) padeye that exists now.
As for the Wyliecat’s sheeting arrangement…it seems that the single-line-through the block (on the boom) and through the turning blocks (leeward & windward) might make for a nice clean look, but I don’t see the point. Also, there’s a good reason for the multi-block sheeting arrangement on the “standard” booms (absent with the wishbones)…you need the mechanical advantage. There is no mechanical advantage to simply having a turning block on the boom end.
One of the things Hoyt touted (with the wishbone design) was how little effort went into sheeting. I can assure you that’s not the case with 19 feet of “standard” boom and a sail that’s attached to that boom along its entire foot.
If you shorten that single line (from either end), then the “vee” formed where the sheet passes through boom-end block is going to
- Get closer to the deck, and
- Move toward the centerline of the boat.
Tensioning either end of that line (unless it were attached to the boom like a jib sheet) is going to result in equal “stretch” over the entire length of the line (between the winches), and continuing to do so would ultimately bring the boom end to the deck at the centerline of the boat (the same place it would be on the arrangement that’s on mine).
Furthermore, instead of one single sheet for each sail, you now have “two” (ends of the same sheet) to deal with, and two winches occupied, and the need to have some kind of “keeper” to prevent the loss of the end of the sheet through the block if you “drop” the mainsheet (from either end). Inevitably, at some point, you’ll end up with “too much” of the sheet on one side or the other of the boat. Beyond that, that sheet running through that single block makes a hell of a “pinch point” for someone to get caught up in if they happened to be in the way of an inadvertent gybe.
The single mainsheet approach makes a whole lot more sense to me…and is a lot safer. Dropping (or pulling) the car on a track to leeward with a separate line is a pretty simple process (and isn’t absolutely “necessary” at the time of the turn…you can tack first and then adjust it, just as you do with the mainsheet when tacking.
John,
You assume that there are two running parts to the sheet, but there’s only one. The other end is fixed to the deadeye. And if you would pull the boom or wishbone end all the way down to the deck, it would slide out to leeward, and not stay in the middle. Think of the traveller arrangement on the Laser; only if you slack off the sheet, it seeks the middle point. If you take a look at the mainsheet arrangement on the Open 60 monohulls, you’ll find they do it in exactly the same way with a single block on the boom end. In stead of our four part sheet, they have one powerful winch. And just to cheer you up: a wishbone needs the same force to sheet in as a normal boom, I can assure you.
Michel, John
The mainsheet on my PHS39 was strange arrangement that ran from the traveller on the rear cockpit coaming up to a block on the end of the boom, along the bottom of the boom to a block about a meter from the gooseneck then down thru blocks on the deck and back to the electric winch, so you could haul it at the traveller or on the winch. I didn’t like this setup at all, and noticed that the blocks at the end of the boom and on the traveller were designed to give a double-sheet arrangement, in fact a 5 part purchase. I re-rove it like that and it works fine. You end up with two ends - pull either, or pull both for full advantage. The tails could be joined to give a continuous line, I guess, and they remain long enough to run round the winch (I think). While they’re not joined one does tend to get longer and the other shorter, but this is easily corrected. I suspect I’ve reverted to the original arrangement, and it’s far better than the way the p.o. had it.
John mentions the possible need for a keeper on each end of such a double mainsheet - the manual that came with the PHS39 says you should use such anyway, especially when running in order to stop the boom going forward of right angles to the fore/aft line of the vessel. If you were to splice the ends together as above then no need for keepers.
My foresail traveller line isn’t led back to the cockpit; when tacking the traveller just zips across. This seems to work fine as it is and would do the same with the control line removed. Is there any point in having it/hauling the fore (smaller) sail in on a schooner when beating?
Brian Kerslake, ‘Paradox’ PHS, Brighton UK
My foresail traveller line isn’t led back to the cockpit; when tacking the traveller just zips across. This seems to work fine as it is and would do the same with the control line removed. Is there any point in having it/hauling the fore (smaller) sail in on a schooner when beating?
I am just beginning work on the foresail sheeting arrangements on Fyne Spirit and there are several interesting comments in this thread which have got me thinking.
The track is well worn and the car is completely shot. The PO has had it lashed mid ships for a while and i have continued with this set up and it seems OK. I have found when beating I have the sail sheeted right in, maybe 5 deg off the centreline. I had heard that 10Deg was the minimum and started at this point, but got better performance sheeting in further. 85-90 deg tack to tack, and there are not too many boats that can catch me beating up the harbour. On this experience I thought of doing away with the track and going to a single padeye in the deck but… I read the comment that the track enables the boom to be kept down more easily. My foresail vang has had a hard time, busted lug at the mast base, seriously deformed shackle (almost sheared) on the boom block, so I am thinking the loads may be too much for the vang alone? With conventional rigs the boom does not go out as far when running so maybe the vang does not have to carry the same loads. Because I have only one winch (manual unfortunately!) purchase for sheeting has to be via blocks at the boom so the two pad eye system might not be suitable. Comments, advice would be much appreciated. Thanks,
Mike,
If you have the same Shaefer track as I have, the bearing balls are easily replaced. They are 1/4" standard bearing balls. It’s a bit of a trick to get them in (they are only held in place by the track). you could do away with the track of course and replace it with one or two deadeyes.
About your vang: my Laser days taught me to release the cunningham and outhaul when letting the sheet out for an off wind course. This was to prevent the boom or vang from breaking because when sheeting out, the sail gets tightened. I kept this practice and let go of the outhaul (or actually the choker on a wishbone rig) to prevent the slides getting too much pressure and to create a fuller sail.
I’ll go with Michel (below) that the boom will seek the leeward-most point allowed by the sheet…the obvious result of that being that you’ll never be able to sheet in the main any further toward the centerline than the attachment points/blocks on the side decks. This seems a little strange to me. The Hoyt manual for the boat (with the original wishbone booms) says you should never sheet in closer than 60% of the distance from the midline of the boat to the leeward rail. You wouldn’t be able to get that much unless the blocks/attachment points were set inboard somewhat. Since the boat is approx 13’ on the beam at the wide point, you’re looking at 60% of 6.75 feet or 4.05 feet. That would be a straight track with a length of 8’ or a curved track with the end points of the arc at 8’. I’m thinking that, on the F40, with the significant arch in the deck at that point, that I’d be looking at an elevated track with a pretty large drop to the deck at the track ends. I’m not really ready to wrap my head around that kind of a “construction” out there, aesthetically speaking, never mind the “boat buck plus” that it would take to buy the pieces.
I think I’ll just stick with what I’ve got and think about putting the money into a Garhauer vang rather than the soft vangs I use now.
Speaking of vangs, I got hit by a sudden windshift in a freaky local squall while entering the boat basin in Port Aransas a few years ago. I had a lot of vang set on the mizzen, and the resulting crash-jibe blew the stainless steel wire pendant on the mizzen vang and sent pieces of the eye flying across the cockpit like bullets. Thankfully, nobody was hurt, but it sounded like a gunshot, complete with richochet noises. That may be what deformed your shackle.
It never occurred to me to put a positive stop on the sheet to prevent the boom going forward of 90 degrees, but that does make sense. Actually, due to the length of the standoff on my goosenecks, I can go forward of 90% a little bit, but it does seem like a good idea to have a positive stop, as opposed to relying on “paying attention to what one is doing”.
John,
Here’s a photo of the mainsheet traveller on the F44. As you guessed correctly, the ends of the track are elevated from the cambered deck and supported by teak blocks. At the track ends there are (almost) 1’ long bolts going all the way through the block and the deck. If I were redesigning this, I would never do it that way. If it weren’t for the two dozen holes in the deck and the damaged non skid pattern underneath the blocks, I’d do away with the track altogether. In a gybe the mainsheet always wraps around the end of the track.
Michel, thanks for your reply. As a conscientious avoider of “wet arse” sailing I obviously missed out on some key sailing knowledge. When we are cruising in warmer climes I will have a go in a dinghy.
From your photo I can see your reason for not wanting to do away with the track - all the holes. Fortunately I have a teak deck so plugging the holes would be straight forward.
I have just changed the outhaul from single to double purchase. It travels down the boom to a jam cleat at the goose neck, and it doesn’t give much purchase so I usually join it to a reefing line and winch it in to get the tension. The boom is fixed at the goose neck to the mast so no vertical adjustment (cunningham as I understand it) so for down wind are you suggesting let off the outhaul and let the halyard off a bit also?
The track car is IYE make and appears to have plastic balls. I will check with our local bearing supplier to see if they are available, though getting rid of the track altogether has a lot of appeal. I am uncertain about two pad eyes or one, given that the boat goes well with the foresail sheeted well in. Maybe a combination of single pad eye, boom brake and vang along with your suggestions re outhaul and luff tension would be the answer?
John, we did have an explosive episode with the forward vang, a lug on an aluminium ring at the base of the mast failed just like a gunshot. The boom went skywards, parallel to the mast, the sail wrapped around the mast breaking most of the battens, alltogether not a fun experience. You are most likely right about the shackle. Something to be avoided in the future.
Kind regards,
Mike,
Since I am a proponent of rig simplicity (after all that’s one of the reasons to choose a Freedom cat) I have no cunningham either. I let go of the halyard and the outhaul when sheeting out. The outhaul is an undervalued trimming tool on many straight boomed boats. Sailors with loose footed mains or wishbones usually do more with their outhauls because they can see better what the effect is. With a bolt rope in the boom, you don’t really see the difference it makes. I know a few sailors who changed their mainsail to loose footed for that reason. It only takes a bit of reinforcement of the clew.
Many F40s were delivered with just a single padeye for the sheets; I don’t see why it wouldn’t work. It takes a stronger vang to keep the boom down on close hauled courses when the boom end is over or near the toerail though. I know of several Freedoms that broke their boom or vang, so the stress is not to be under estimated. Modern Freedom vangs don’t use the lugs in the deck collar, they all have a heavy stainless ring clamped around the base of the mast with a huge lug on it. There are photos somewhere on this site that show this. I have wishbones, so no vang at all.
Michel,
Thanks for your response. My sails are both now loose footed due to the stack pack being fitted with a bolt rope in the boom, and I have just made the stainless strap you describe on the foremast, based on the one on the main mast. I’ll see if I can get a picture on here soon.
So it looks like I will head towards a single padeye, ss strap on mast, your suggested adjustments to outhaul and halyard when running, and the money I might have spent on overhauling the track assembly can go towards a boom brake. That should be a nice simple setup. Next problem is the main (mizzen) sheet. Aside from the boom brake, which seems to be highly thought of, Brian and I seem to agree that some kind of frame would eb in order to protect the helmsman and anything in the pushpit rail. Perhaps such a frame could incorporate a bimini. My existing bimini frame is too far forward and when deployed really obstructs access on the side decks. A frame further aft might solve two problems. Cheers, Mike.
You could go for a frame of course. Personally, I’m not fond of alien matter on and around the boat. A Freedom is odd enough as it is.
My aft sheet (mizzen) scrapes along the pushpit (which a bit higher than standard (75 cm)). I sailed an F33/35 catketch for 7 years and an F44 catketch for three years now and I never felt the need for something to keep the sheet out. I always guide the sheet along to the other side when gybing by grabbing the bunch, dragging in the boom and throwing the bunch of sheet aft as soon as the boom passes. If sailing with crew, I let them duck below coaming height if I gybe in high winds, just to make sure. And if you sheet out far enough, there is not a big chance on an accidental gybe. We have no shrouds, so the boom can wing out 90*.
A boom brake I have on my to do list. I’m going for that cheap version with a decender eight from my mountaineering kit. The abseil-8 works the same as the official boom brake but only costs 8 euros.
Michel, I could afford 8 Euros, where can I get one? Mike.
Michel, on the frame etc I often sail in flukey winds in the Marlborough sounds so gybing is often down to unexpect sudden shifts. I have even had double gybes one of which left me with a grazed neck and ear when the sheet dropped around my neck. I reduced the purchase on the sheet so it can be hauled in more quickly and have the sheet right by the transom instead of routed along the boom to the base of the mast and back to the cockpit as it was. There is just too much power to grab the slack sheets and haul the boom over, I have found the safest thing is to keep out of the way. I reckon the boom brake will help a great deal so I will give this a try first before looking at the frame idea, but I am still left with the problem that the existing bimini arrangement severely restricts access to the side decks. Kind regards,
These guys probably sell them. http://www.southernapproach.co.nz/. There’s a very active and high tech mountaineering community in NZ.
Michel mentioned his technique of easing both the cunningham and outhaul to ease the stresses and increase speed during a downwind run with a Laser. Michel failed to note that on a Laser, one must also keep the vang tight so that the top of the mainsail doesn’t “fall off” and cause that awful downwind “death roll” and subsequent capsize to leeward. Somehow, in the extended discussion, this got translated to easing the outhaul (or choker) and the halyard. Easing the halyard seems a nonuseful way to accomplish sail fullness. Think about the relative difficulty of retensioning the halyard in stiff breezes. The cunningham is named after Briggs Cunningham, its inventor. It consists of an additional tack grommet (and reinforcements) a short distance vertically above the “normal” tack grommet. It has a SS hook and tackle that is used to primarily to move the fullness in the sail forward when it’s tightened. Its action is not quite the same as tightening the halyard. The Cunningham, in combination with the outhaul is used to manage the mainsail’s shape in differing wind conditions and different headings. I felt that I had to put my two cents into this discussion of sail shape esoterica.
Herm S/V Impulse (Mull 28)
Thanks Herm…
You saved me from throwing in my own two cents worth on the same topic.
This is also known in some circles as a “downhaul”.
Also, the cunningham is most effective in combination with a “flattening reef” which is used to tension the leech at the boom end (an eyelet 8" or so above the boom).