Sailing rigs and sails

[dopeydriver]

What books should I be reading to learn about the different styles of sailing rigs , and their advantages and disadvantages.
Regards Rob Johnson.

[Boatmik]

Howdy Rob,

There is a lot of misinformation out there. Most people have their own hobbyhorses or biases and stick to them.

And people who understand modern rigs are appallingly ignorant about old fashioned ones and people who are knowledgeable about old fashioned rigs ...

But in general - Phil Bolger's "100 small boat rigs" is pretty good even if he doesn't seem to know about the best halyard arrangement for lug rigs. But that is not surprising - only Oughtred and me seem to use it and then Oughred doesn't use it on all his boats but sometimes uses a system that jams badly.

Otherwise read stuff by racing guys about racing rigs and understand that they are basically wrong about older rigs having poor performance.

And read material by traditionalists and know that modern racing rigs are actually highly reliable despite what they say and some modern features - particularly modern low stretch ropes are invaluable on older style rigs - though they would never admit it.

But Bolger is pretty educational and is right most of the time. Read anything by Bolger - period!

MIK

[dopeydriver]

Thanks MIK , I think I saw that book in Duckflats bookstore , so I'll contact them .
I'm interested in all of it of course , but the sailing I did last week was interesting , a 28 footer easily sailed by one bloke , with furling staysails and stuff.
And that got me trying to understand different setups , and of course thats not easy with little to no experience , so I'm wanting to try to edercate myself from books.
One interesting one was a staysail ketch , with 3 furling staysails , one being from the mizzen , going forward.
What would be the advantages of that ?.
My uneducated guess is that it would be better to balance the drive in heavier weather , but I'd be glad to hear from someone who knows more than me (which isn't hard !).
Rob J

[Boatmik]

Howdy,

The below is a mix of opinion and fact. You'll just have to start getting time out on the water to start putting it all together in your head with your own sense of priorities

It sounds a little complicated and expensive having all those furling sails on a little 28ft boat.

The general rule of thumb is that with good gear a single person can handle a 500 square foot sail by themselves as far a raising and lowering and general handling - that's what they say.

So above a certain point you do want to divide things up.

But if you do it too early it may cut into efficiency - because a single sail is always more efficient in the normal range of sailing conditions than any two sails - or two sails are more efficient than 3.

In general sails with their luffs attached to masts and their foots attached to booms are a lot less work than sails hung from a wire - and also stress the mast and the boat less. Also you generally don't have to touch anything when tacking with the former - just push the tiller over

Free standing rigs are also low stress in terms of stressing up the hull and mast and have fewer bits that can break

Even with furling gear it can be quite difficult to make too many sails on a little boat all work OK and furling gear THAT REALLY WORKS IN ALL CONDITIONS is really expensive.

MIK

[Oyster]

And people who understand modern rigs are appallingly ignorant about old fashioned ones and people who are knowledgeable about old fashioned rigs ...

Its also important to have the proper rig to match the proper boat, depending on the hull designs and draft.

[dopeydriver]

Sorry MIK , although the 28 footer had 1 furling staysail , the Ketch with 3 I was referring to is the 50 ft Tasmanian ketch the "Stormalong".
I have heard 2 very good reports about her , but I was just trying to figure out the logic of the sail plan.
Rob J.

[Boatmik]

Howdy,

It makes much more sense on a 50 footer. Keeps each of the sails reasonably small.

The only prob with furling jibs is that though they are a great way to get rid of a sail completely they are often sold with the idea that you can roll it halfway so it works "just the same" as having different sized jibs and genoas.

It might be sorta true downwind but upwind it is hard to get good sailshape. Some sailmakers put a shaped pad up the luff of the sail that helps keep the sail a somewhat better shape when partly furled. But it is still a bit of a kludge.

HOt shorthanded boats (monos and multis) have moved to much smaller jibs in recent years having finally realised that genoa jibs were only ever for rule cheating and didn't add much performance for all their cost. And the four or six other headsails that were required for different conditions.

A very expensive way of going

Since that generous treatment of genoas has ceased they are becoming much less common on the racecourse.

Generally sails attached to masts by their luffs with booms are MUCH easier on the crew than headsails.

Maybe that will give you some idea of where things are heading.

This really reflects workboat practice which was to have a big light wind rig that was easy to reef effectively.

Whereas the "free" (ie unpenalised) area of all the different genoas and pretty kites worked on the opposite principle. Under the measured sail area the poor boat couldn't sail out of its own way in light and even medium conditions so extra sails would be added at great expense. I've sailed on boats that had 8 headsails and 5 spinnakers to choose from.

The REALLY silly thing is that for the last 50 years almost every CRUISING boat designer has felt that the big multi genoas were the best rig for their purposes - sheer stupidity. Name all the good expensive cruising boats - Nautor Swan, Beneteau, Gibb'sea and most others were sucked in by the same con - all imitated the expensive and unseamanlike rigs of the racers.

But with some older and heavier boats there is no other way other than the genoa to get enough sail on the rig to get the boat going in light and moderate stuff.

And often this difficulty is only because they got rid of the original gaff mainsail that had double or more the area of the bermudan sail that was its replacement.

Of course if the boat is really big - and 50 ft is big - the sails have to be divided up to make them easy enough to handle.

So that's a bit of a talk around the subject.

MIK

[Boatmik]

Its also important to have the proper rig to match the proper boat, depending on the hull designs and draft.

I'd disagree a little. If the boat has enough sail to drive it - and the sail is not so high up that the boat heels excessively for its righting moment - and the centre of effort of the sail is lined up with the centre of lateral resistance - then it doesn't matter what the actual configuration is.

Though a boat that is a poor manouverer might make benefit from a bowsprit and mizzen.

And anything else (unless it is bigger than most of us can afford) will be cheaper simpler and easier to run with a minimum of headsails and a minimum number of sails total.

[Oyster]

In the good old days dealing with boat designs and their uses, most evolved from working classes which required some altering of the rigs if you compare this to today's boats. These types boats dealt with more inshore cargo hauling and working the water in all regions of the world. Draft was not as great in many of these hulls, of course depending on the locations of the world.

This created rigs that were more for "making way" than speed. This also changed many of the hull bottoms which also required somewhat different rigs than cruising boats that we see now. Matching riggs to traditional lines and hulls is important, since many variable exists in the designs of their own bottoms and ballasts, or lack of in some cases of huge fishing hulls. many of the boats with massage sail area, also had more than one reef point, since working in all weather conditions and weather changes existed. Also in the working class hulls, loads was the ballast, unlike modern day hulls which also add ballast as a given, allowing for faster hulls and "idiot proof operations" of these hulls.

As someone that is drawn to some of the older hulls, its important to keep in mind that you cannot over emphasize that most give up speeds to the newer hulls riggs. Complexity of the rigging as in the older hulls,, even though in todays circles the rigs are fancier, also now create issues for the outlaying areas of the world if you need to fix someting if it breaks or hangs up, unlike in the real old days. We see people cruising farther and farther now. There is indeed a difference in some of the older designers and boats versus modern day "warriors".

[dopeydriver]

I just know that the 2 really experienced sailers that I know that have sailed the "Stormalong" have really really liked her.
You can see her at http://www.oystercoveboats.com.au then go to commercial.
I'd just like an insight in to the setup , how the different sails would drive and effect the balance of the boat , what order you would use them in , etc.
A curious Rob J.

[Boatmik]

I like her just looking at the pics.

Be aware that boats this big have a serious maintenance cost if you want to keep them up to spec.

For example the most common sized yacht for living aboard while world cruising is between 32 and 38 ft. This size is the most cost effective for the space. Reduces sail repair and replacement costs, mooring/marina fees, slippage fees, antifouling costs, mechanical costs, fuel costs etc

I think if you had the money and/or time to keep her in the style in which she is accustomed and you were happy that she won't be able to sail upwind to save herself (that's where the big donk comes in) and she would be an awful boat to tack or gybe - three headsails to get across. Only a small gap between the front two meaning that the forward one might have to be part furled.

Not that any of that is a problem if you work with the vessel rather than expect her to do things she just ain't.

Another caution is the price. It looks WAAAAY too cheap for a boat of this size. There may not be a rat that I'm sniffing - bargains do exist, but not usually through a broker - actually price tends to be in line with value. A boat of this size should be 2 to three times the price.

Never, Ever, consider buying a boat of this size (or probably any boat bigger than a trailer boat) without a survey by an independent surveyor - it might cost you a few hundred but it might save you $10-150K.

MIK

[meerkat]

... Most people have their own hobbyhorses or biases and stick to them.

Noooooooooo!!!! Thats just not right ;);):D

Does bear doodoo stick to rabbits fur you bet ya!!

I'd call you dopey but you might get offended...:D Rob without sucking up to MIK coz hes a good guy etc, :cool: listen to some of the guys on the forum, whether it be read a particular book or heed their advice. Theres is a lot of worldly wisdom to be learned here.


Hey MIK was that ok ? When can I expect the cheque ?;):D:D

[Boatmik]

This created rigs that were more for "making way" than speed. This also changed many of the hull bottoms which also required somewhat different rigs than cruising boats that we see now.

Matching riggs to traditional lines and hulls is important, since many variable exists in the designs of their own bottoms and ballasts, or lack of in some cases of huge fishing hulls.

I'd disagree completely with old sails and rigs being for making way rather than making speed.

The whole history of sailing vessel design has been about performance. Whether it was about the Portugeuse being the first to make their boats go to windward well enough to get down the West Coast of Africa and around the Cape of Good Hope to the "Spice Islands" - it was considered impossible before then and a very long walk!

Or the clipper ships or fishing boats being the first to market.

Or the Falmouth Quay punts being able to make the most trips to shore to load and unload a bigger boat.

Or the Arab Dhows that used to be able to outsail Western boats of the same era as soon as the wind came ahead of the beam.

Revenue cutters through to colliers - each was drawn up to be as fast as possible within the constraints of payload, crew size and sailing conditions.

Traditionally sailing until recently was about commerce. Almost every boat was drawn with the purpose of getting the most speed for its carrying capacity.

More speed means more trips - particularly when sailing conditions are not ideal.

There are boats like those in Sri Lanka that can't sail upwind at all but are sailed or rowed out in the morning on the land breeze and return reliably under sail with the sea breeze behind them. But the first guy in still sells all his fish. The others may not be so lucky.

Speed is also safety - when you don't have an engine - it means the boat can keep going when the going gets tough - cover ground in light winds and adverse currents. Or keep height and speed when beating off a lee shore in the nasty stuff. There was no option to start a motor in those days.

Don't get me wrong - I am not pushing modern rigs and hulls at all - they are right in their place (on a racecourse when someone has enough money to pay for all the fancy bits) and my own designs sport traditional rigs.


many of the boats with massage sail area, also had more than one reef point, since working in all weather conditions and weather changes existed.Exactly right! The idea of having a stupidly small sailplan and lots of extra sails for light wind and downwind is almost totally a modern phenomenon.

A traditional rig will have a fixed number of sails that give good sailing performance in light winds whereas until recently a modern boat might have 4 to 10 sails of which it can only set 2 at any time upwind or 3 downwind.

The general trend with small traditional boats was to have the minimum number of sails that could be handled reliably. More sails - usually means a bigger crew - all of whom have to be paid.

That is where a lot of the expense and excessive labour in sailing "modern" boats comes from. Though finally they are starting to get the point and forget the genoas and go to bigger mainsails with short footed jibs.
_________________________________

Traditional rigs are FAAAAST with a few exceptions - they only lose a few percentage points of performance over modern rigs but save heaps of dollars - but they need to be set up properly.

Some people who know how to sail and how to set up boats have given us great examples of traditional hulls and rigs that can go like the proverbial against more conventional boats - Woodenboat magazine has had a few articles on "Curlew" a turn of the century boat that is used for world cruising but the owners love racing too - they have run away with regattas.

I have in my "Beth" - a sailing canoe with a balance lug ketch rig that I have won regattas in against both modern and traditional boats.

Rigs can be mixed and matched with hulls quite freely - because most sailplans if well set up have quite good performance. There is little or nothing between a lug, gaff, bermudan, sprit, lateen and many others. There is probably more variation in performance within one of the types I have mentioned - say the different lug rigs - than there are between the lug and the gaff.

Best Regards to All

Michael Storer

[dopeydriver]

Well Meerkat , I'm posting because I want to learn , I'm asking questions , because I'm searching for answers.
And I know and respect MIK , we worked together for 10 days at the wooden boat school , and we shared the same shack at Hindmarsh for that time.
I like the old work boats , and I love timber boats , so boats like this naturally I'm going to be interested in.
And I want to know why some work better than others , blah blah blah !.
I wouldn't be buying something like this till I had a lot more experience , and I knew I had someone to sail with me .That will take time .
But I'm still going to annoy I guess , by keeping on asking questions.
I hope you don't mind !.
Rob J.

[Oyster]

I'd disagree completely with old sails and rigs being for making way rather than making speed.


Fine but address the core and central point of what I addressed and comes into play in this or any other working hull Try to fly the full sails that were used on working rigs without a load on working hulls and see what you get. The log canoes, [even seen them in action on the water in heavy weather?] are a good example of what you had better do with a lite load or no load in some old working hulls. The captains knew how to sail them and work them, and certainly did not have speed as a number one criteria as much as having something that was workable in various conditions. The club footed sprit of Ketch rig was another fine example of a working rigging which is not used in modern day hulls.


Yes many were over canvased for a lot or reasons making them fast but with exceptions especially for the novice sailor nowadays trying to reproduce the same. The issue was comparing old traditional rigs to modern day boats especially when you take into consideration the giveaway of WEIGHT in modern built hulls with core and plywoods versus thee hull in question. Ballast also came into play, especially when considering something smaller and trailable in designing rags and rigs for new hulls.

[meerkat]

Well Meerkat , I'm posting because I want to learn , I'm asking questions , because I'm searching for answers.
And I know and respect MIK , we worked together for 10 days at the wooden boat school , and we shared the same shack at Hindmarsh for that time.
I like the old work boats , and I love timber boats , so boats like this naturally I'm going to be interested in.
And I want to know why some work better than others , blah blah blah !.
I wouldn't be buying something like this till I had a lot more experience , and I knew I had someone to sail with me .That will take time .
But I'm still going to annoy I guess , by keeping on asking questions.
I hope you don't mind !.
Rob J.
Not at all Rob, I will most probably learn more from your questions as well.

btw I get the feeling I may have upset you with my response, this was not my intention.

[dopeydriver]

Meerkat , the internet is a poor medium at times.
I just thought I'd better put my case , so that everyone knows where I am coming from.
I'll ley you know when I get to Portland , maybe you could make it there for a Friday arvo couta boat session !<VBG>.
Rob J.

[meerkat]

mmmmmmm couta boats now you are teasing me ;):D

[Boatmik]

Fine but address the core and central point of what I addressed and comes into play in this or any other working hull Try to fly the full sails that were used on working rigs without a load on working hulls and see what you get.

I think I had - which was that there is no real difference between a trad rig and a modern rig. Both of them are methods for getting sails to the right shape - and the sail shapes are common to them both. That is defined by physics

The modern rigs might allow more adjustment - which is where a large part of the excessive cost of their rigs lies - but the sailshapes that a trad rig is aiming at are identical.

This is of course within the framework of a particular hull. If you have a burdensome blunt shaped vessel it will have to have slightly fuller sails and probably set them at a slightly wider angle to the centreline - and that is the case for either modern or trad rigs.

If the boat doesn't have a great deal of stability the rig will have to be lower - whether it is trad or modern. In some cases this might mean having to go to trad rig purely to get enough sail area on the boat using four sided sails rather than three sided ones.


The club footed sprit of Ketch rig was another fine example of a working rigging which is not used in modern day hulls. I agree completely - a lot of the old methods have a real utility that is missing from modern boats.


Yes many were over canvased for a lot or reasons making them fast but with exceptions especially for the novice sailor nowadays trying to reproduce the same. I wasn't making any comment about overcanvassing - efficiency is generally about getting the most speed from the smallest (cheapest in terms of both sails and rigging) as possible. Thus the refinement of traditional sailing craft into faster and faster boats as time passed.


The captains knew how to sail them and work them, and certainly did not have speed as a number one criteria as much as having something that was workable in various conditions.I agree with the workability being as important as speed - no point in having speed just in one set of conditions and have the boat dead slow or impossible to handle in others.

I gave enough examples of the thinking behind why there was such great pressure to make traditional working boats as fast as possible.

It is still true of large commercial vessels. If a tanker or freighter can be made to run at 13.25 knots rather than 13 for the same power and cargo then the boat has the potential to hundreds more voyages before the hull becomes too old to be serviceable.

Passenger ferries are getting faster and faster too.

As soon as commerce enters the equation so does speed.

They didn't call the Australia to England wheat run in Clipper ships "The Great Grain Race" for nothing.

And the same pressure to do the job quickly filters down through every application in the era of commercial sail.


The issue was comparing old traditional rigs to modern day boats especially when you take into consideration the giveaway of WEIGHT in modern built hulls with core and plywoods versus thee hull in question. Ballast also came into play, especially when considering something smaller and trailable in designing rags and rigs for new hulls.YOu didn't state this - you talked about how trad rigs and boats were not designed to go quickly.

I agree with your statement above. Whether the hull or rig is traditional or modern it is important to design to the physical parameters - displacement, carrying capacity, required speed, required stability range, hull drag (both still water and in a seaway), sailing conditions, crew size, ease of handling.

As soon as the boat is lighter or has more stability or has more or less lateral plane then the sail disposition will have to be changed. What matters is the size and distribution of the sail area for the particular boat as well as some broader more detail things like sail fullness, sheeting angles and the like. What sticks and ropes are used to hold the sail area in that configuration is almost completely irrelevant.

Within quite a wide frame a good mix of qualities can be acheived with a trad or modern rig fitted to a trad or modern hull in just about any combination.

If the boat is blunt and burdensome (whether it is modern or trad) the sails will have to be a bit fuller (whether modern or trad).

There is no line separating trad from modern as you seem to be suggesting - they have to both answer to the sea, to physics and engineering in just the same way.

Best Wishes to all!

Michael Storer

[Oyster]

There is no line separating trad from modern as you seem to be suggesting -

Sure there is a difference by the single issue of hull construction methods and materials. The hulls built in 1935 in no way compares to the hulls being built in 2006. The uses of the hulls in 1935 is also different in 2006. Your initial post, #2 addresses the issue of ignorance.



And people who understand modern rigs are appallingly ignorant about old fashioned ones and people who are knowledgeable about old fashioned rigs ...


I darn sure do understand some of the technical aspects of the two contrasting hulls which was in my initial post, #5 and pointed out in my followup posts which you eluded to in your above post.

More to the point, this potential purchase and ad suggests to me that its a hard sell and surely a high maintainance item for someone with little or no experience, with nothing more than just plain boat lust. Whether this be case, I have no idea. But the ad itself , or to anyone with any knowledge knows that without more detail such as a competent surveyor, he may be in for some real issues that may keep him for even learning how to sail the existing rig on the boat now.

[dopeydriver]

Let me assure you Oyster , parting me and whatever money I have is never going to be easy.
I would need to know I had the experience and the setup to be able to use the boat ( I certainly don't now) , and yes , it would be gone over by the best in the business.
I like that style of boat , that I don't deny , but the chances of me getting one ?, who knows , I certainly don't !.
But they do catch my eye , and they do invoke questions , that I'm afraid I'll continue asking.
And because I've continued asking questions , not only on this forum , but of people who know the boat , I'm finding out answers , and I hope to be asking questions of someone who got to know it very well soon , and is very experienced.
Its just my nature !.
Rob J.

[Boatmik]

Sure there is a difference by the single issue of hull construction methods and materials. The hulls built in 1935 in no way compares to the hulls being built in 2006. The uses of the hulls in 1935 is also different in 2006. Your initial post, #2 addresses the issue of ignorance.

Hmmmm, we hadn't mentioned that :-)

And it is sort of relevant because I am doing some work in this coming week changing a design for a 1934 Scandinavian racing boat over to modern glued clinker construction for a client.

Looking at the rig it is entirely modern. The height of the mast above deck is 13 metres on a 8 metre boat. A displacement of 3500kg with a ballast ratio of 60% and a sail area of 32 sq metres not including headsail overlap. Forestay base is very narrow. The aspect ratio is way beyond what you would see on the rig of most modern boats.

And the construction is completely traditional.

I agree with what you are saying in general - you can build a modern timber hull to be stronger for the same weight or lighter for the same strength.

And you are perfectly right to warn about the perils of sticking a modern rig on any older hull - some forms of construction are not up to it.


Quote - boatmik:And people who understand modern rigs are appallingly ignorant about old fashioned ones and people who are knowledgeable about old fashioned rigs ...

Reply - oyster: I darn sure do understand some of the technical aspects of the two contrasting hulls which was in my initial post, #5 and pointed out in my followup posts which you eluded to in your above post.

I am sorry - I wasn't referring to you in particular but to the general case - you don't seem ignorant at all.

But in general there is a huge gulf between those who stick on one side or another of the general argument.


More to the point, this potential purchase and ad suggests to me that its a hard sell and surely a high maintainance item for someone with little or no experience, with nothing more than just plain boat lust. Whether this be case, I have no idea. But the ad itself , or to anyone with any knowledge knows that without more detail such as a competent surveyor, he may be in for some real issues that may keep him for even learning how to sail the existing rig on the boat now.

I agree completely

[Oyster]

Sometimes when we all have nothing more than just a bunch of print to express or to translate our own brainwaves, things can be a bit confusing and misunderstood. I never worried about it either way. No harm here. Over and out. :)