Can You Advise re Standing Rigging

[blownabout]

Hello everyone,

I am pretty new to sailing and have recently purchased an 18' plywood "Caprice" bilge keeler. It's on mooring on Lake Macquarie, NSW.

I'll be taking it out of the water for some maintanence soon and would like some advice on a possible modification I have in mind on the shroud positions.

Current configuration is - to the mast top (cap stays?) one forestay, two backstays. side stays with spreaders swept back slightly - aprox 10 deg, they atach to the hull about a foot or so behind the level of the mast.
- shorter stays attach to the mast maybe 2/3 of the way up. One in front and one each side level with the mast.

What I would like to do is to switch the side stays (shrouds?) around so that the top ones with the spreaders attach level with the mast (fore/aft-wise) and the inner (shorter) stays attach at the rearward points where the the upper ones are now.

I think this would allow me to run the jib sheets inside the stays and hopefully point better and would also mean I could let the main sail out further before rubbing the stays when broad reaching/running.

Do any of you more experienced guys know of any reason I shouldn't do this switch?

Please excuse any misuse of terms (corrections welcome).

Thanks in advance
Chris

[onthebeachalone]

I am pretty new to sailing and have recently purchased an 18' plywood "Caprice" bilge keeler. It's on mooring on Lake Macquarie, NSW. As that a Caprice bilge keeler as in designed by Robert Tucker?

What I would like to do is to switch the side stays (shrouds?) around so that the top ones with the spreaders attach level with the mast (fore/aft-wise) and the inner (shorter) stays attach at the rearward points where the the upper ones are now.From where I'm standing I would have thought that is the way it should be.

Anyone else?

Edited to add...

A few years ago I purchased a Robert Tucker Ballerina II bilge keeler (21' 6"), and managed to track down a set of plans. I have just checked them out and find they are pretty much as you describe so it must have been an approach he followed. It seems unnecessarily complex to me in a boat that size. The original plan showed a wooden mast but mine had an aluminium mast and much simpler rig.

[blownabout]

Yep, it's Tucker. Has "1967" carved in the keel.

The setup I'm suggesting certainly seems more sensible to me. I'm wondering if someone of little common sense has switched them around in the past but being pretty new to it all I was also wondering if there was some reason for the way it is.

[blownabout]

I have just checked them out and find they are pretty much as you describe so it must have been an approach he followed.

Do you mean your plans are the same as my current setup or as I propose?

[onthebeachalone]

I don't want to embarrass myself, or cause you undue gloom and despondency, but here is a link with a bit about our Ballerina
http://www.profitworks.com.au/wooden%20boats/#Cinderella

You might just be able to see in the pic of Sylpide, another Ballerina, that the stays are swept back, but it doesn't seem as strong that way to me.

Unless somebody more experienced than I am in rigging says otherwise, I would be inclined to go with the changes you suggested.

[onthebeachalone]

Do you mean your plans are the same as my current setup or as I propose? As your current setup.

[Bodgy]

I think the reason why your upper shrouds are swept back is so that the racing nuts can cinch on the main a few more inches and hence point up a bit higher. I can't see a problem with what you propose, particularly with twin backstays.

Two points to bear in mind, firstly, by running your sheets inboard of the lower shrouds, would you actually gain any advantage? You may find that you're pinching up, and the airflow (the jib only really directs the air over the back of the main) becomes less effective in terms of thrust.

Secondly, the force on the upper shrouds is enormous, second only to the fore stay. Can you find, or make, a new strong point, good enough to cope with the pull?

Finally, you realise you won't be able to fly a genoa without buggering about with the sheet leads.

Hope this helps, I don't know the boat. I'm assuming it goes racing?

[blownabout]

Bodgy -

I've tried running the sheets inside now but the jib fouls on the lower shroud. Even so I seem to be able to point nearly 10 deg closer to the wind that way.
The Genoa still has to go around the outside.

I wouldn't mind having a go at some not so serious racing - I've only been sailing this boat for about 3 months and Sailability "Access" dinghies for about 6 - 8 months before that (disabled daughter). Add to that the fact that the Caprice seems more of an Austin Freeway than a Maserati and I wonder if I wouldn't just be in the way of the racers.

[Bodgy]

Blownabout

Don't worry about the red hot racing boys, they love a dog. It puts them one up the results list.

As I said, I don't know the boat, but when really close hauled you may well get closer to the wind, but what hapens to your speed over the ground, ie extra leeway and loss of knots?

Some boats are dogs, but when properly tuned and sailed well, they'll often beat the gin palaces.

We won the Sydney/Lord Howe short handed once, in what could be accurately described as an aircraft carrier with sails. It blew 60 knots, we trimmed the sails, had a few G&Ts followed by a 3 course dinner and a very cheeky red, whilst all the other quick boats lost rigging and got blown toward Cairns.

Without being patronising, maybe get out in your boat, get a bit of sea time, and familiararity with her, then see what's needed.

I also forgot to add that the swept back shrouds will also increase the angle that the shroud meets the cap stay, hence giving more mast support without impacting the mainsail and genoa when close hauled, as would 90 degree spreaders.

[Boatmik]

Secondly, the force on the upper shrouds is enormous, second only to the fore stay. Can you find, or make, a new strong point, good enough to cope with the pull?

And the spreaders of a masthead rig are not designed to handle the loads of being pulled out of line fore and aft.

If you move the base of the uppers forwards the spreader angle will have to be changed to stay reasonably close to being in line - and not throw the spreader more than an inch or so out out of line fore and aft.

It is OK for the spreaders to push the uppers quite a long way straight outwards (ie spreaders can push the shrouds OUT from the surface of the mast) - but they can only tolerate small loads from pushing or pulling the shroud forwards or backwards.

ie The 10 degree aft angle of the spreaders would have to be changed if the uppers were moved forward.

Michael Storer