Thread: GIS Build in Queenstown New Zealand

Hello,

Welcome to the forum!

1. Watermaat (Ralph) has widened the mid seat a couple of inches (or centimeters whatever you are used to) and closed it in. If you would extend the mid seat all the way to the front of the dagger board case however, it won't leave much space in front for your crew. Depending on the course you are sailing, the second person on the boat quite often sits with his/her legs/feet on the front side of the mid seat which would not be possible any longer if you would widen the seat by that much. Great for carrying gear and such and to increase the volume of the air tanks, but it would really clutter up your cockpit.

2. The GIS doesn't take much water on board when sailing, so I am not sure if such a spray deck will be beneficial. And shouldn't the spray deck deflect any water to the sides of the boat rather than the back? This system might even work against you in case of a capsize as water will get "stuck" behind it. I have never thought about it but I believe that all decks are the same relative height (it seems that when the sail is down, the whole package is supported by all 3 decks). MIK should be able to confirm this.

3. Looks like this system may help you to reef quickly (I just use a metal snap hook for the tack and a piece of rope on the back of the boom going through the eyelet of the sail twice and then tied off).

4. Makes sense if you are sailing on your own.

5. This would avoid drifting to a large extent. In my experience, the boat is so light that it just floats over the waves like a seagull. A sea anchor might cause the boat to buck (as there is not much mass "softening" the sea anchor) so not sure if it would work a treat.

Anyway, just my thoughts. I have been sailing my GIS of one season now (also on large stretches of water with quite a bit of wind) and am happy that I stayed with the plans (fully understand though when people want to optimize the boat for/to their own personal use/taste). I have only made some very minor and light weight changes (bit more timber under the aft deck, doubled up the dagger board gusset, bow reinforced with a piece of hardwood and glass, doubled up ply under part of the mid seat, brass strips under the bottom runners). This season we (Watermaat and myself) intend to do some serious side by side testing in order to sort out the rigs/sails set ups.

Best wishes, Joost

Hi Joost,
Do you have a pic you could post of your reefing setup? I'd be curious to see the different ways people use, especially when singlehanding.
Thanks,
Al

I don't fancy a capsize in Lake Wakatipu. It stays pretty cold doesn't it?

Originally Posted by alzuger

Hi Joost,
Do you have a pic you could post of your reefing setup? I'd be curious to see the different ways people use, especially when singlehanding.
Thanks,
Al

Just checked my photos but don't have anything detailed. It will be a few weeks before my first sail of the season (the temperature is not too bad now in the Netherlands, but it is raining a lot lately) and can take any pictures.

On the front part of the boom I have one of these permanently tied in place in order to quickly "hook" the reef tack ring:

Attachment 133586

On the back of the boom I have just a piece of rope in place tied to the boom and going through the reef clew ring (first reef only) and then back to the boom. That way the reefing system is already in place and it only takes a minute to tie in the reef (hook the reef' tack ring with the snap hook and then tension the sail with the separate "outhaul" in the reef clew ring).

I am sure there are more sofisticated systems out there, but this works for us.

Originally Posted by NCArcher

I don't fancy a capsize in Lake Wakatipu. It stays pretty cold doesn't it?

Easy solution, just don't capsize!

Thanks Joost,
That sounds like a great, simple solution!

GIS -Model - a set on Flickr

Built a model to look at and discuss storage and floatation issues with the forum. Follow the link to the pictures of the model. There is a discuss under Texas GIS about some of the issues you are discussing.

I have elected to keep the boat as orginal as possible. Additional floatation will be added for our long summer cruise. Have a few more ideas but don't have the time now to work on them.

Welcome to the GIS group.

Hi, thanks for the feedback Joost and now others. I was keen to touch base with the Niederlander contingent as you seem to be getting out in open water quite a bit. I'm keen to look at what minimal modifications can be done to increase the safety margins in open water.

First need is easy reefing, plus of the lug rig is it's easy to drop and raise the sail when reefing, minus is nothing to hold the very light boat into the wind, minimise drift while you're doing so. Solutions may be to try a sea anchor set-up, of course there's Clint/Compass Projects Mizzen sail as a possibility, though keeping it simple remains to priority. Rethinking the reefing set-up, something simpler as Joost describes may be more than adequate, I guess I was still thinking in terms of sloop rigs with mast track and heaving to on the backed jib with the boom hanging over the side as the boat's lying somewhat side on and you don't want to pull the mainsail all the way down...

Re-thinking the other mods i suggested:

1. Adding extra buoyancy by extending and boxing the middle seat: Yes it will affect where the crew sits, I'll get a better feel for how much to extend it forward once the hull with centreboard is in front of me. I guess I was thinking of the crew lounging across that big wide seat in light conditions and then sitting on the gunwale with their feet in hiking straps as it gets more interesting. I don't have to commit to the mod till quite late in the build process so will look at it when the time comes. Other options would be to box at the point Watermaat did, or build absolutely standard while leaving BH3 solid, then decide later how much extra to box in. Mik suggested a similar idea in the gis-yawl thread https://www.woodworkforums.com/f169/g...40/index4.html (#49) I'd be curious to think how far he thinks is reasonable, also any feedback from Watermaat once he gets his setup on the water. Playing around with PVC flotation bags would also be something to consider instead of or in addition to some of the above.
2. When I said "spraydeck" I guess I miss-named what I had in mind. Yes, with the bow shape and high sides water won't be coming over the bow, I was thinking of something made of neoprene like a kayak spraydeck that keeps water out of the front part of the boat in a capsize so that part is buoyant and there's less to bail/only that back space needs bailing. Can be made really tight and waterproof and hard to dislodge, but could be ripped off quite quickly if necessary. Would get in the way of crew sitting with legs in front of the middle seat, so would probably only be used when solo/or looking to get into trouble... Looking at Clints picture of his Yawl in sideview https://www.woodworkforums.com/attach...wl-drawing.jpg it looks like the front deck is already a little above the height of the front of the centreboard so I could easily retrofit the rim to hold that neoprene deck in place.

Am building a model to visualise some of these things, and it looks like I won't have to commit to any of them till I have the real boat in front of me.

There seems to be bits of discussions all over the place regarding ways to achive the same aims I have, should we start a new thread on this andor can Mik summarise what directions he thinks are sensible or otherwise? Thanks, Ian

Howdy,

The Goat was really designed to be a very simple boat that would sail somewhat like a modern racing dinghy. Usually for two people. Daysailing. But I have also used racing dinghies as fast weekend cruisers, so that was in the envelope too.

I don't mention this to stop the discussion, just to remember where the starting point of the boat was. By understanding it it tends to highlight the issues that have to be overcome.

It has proven to be more capable in many ways because it is quite controllable and because of the reefing.

Blue water cruising wasn't particularly in the frame when the boat was drawn up. I mean cruising distance as compared to going out on the ocean for a couple of hours and then returning. I used to do that on racing dinghies all the time. I usually understood the safety factors of having another person aboard - one can make sure the boat stays upright, the other can fix whatever the problem is - bailing or trying to rethread the mainsheet or any of the other problems that occur from time to time. There is quite a big safety factor in having a second person.

What can be tricky for only one person can become dead easy with two.

If I was in a racing dinghy I would consider blue water cruising it with onshore breezes and good weather reports, because if anything goes wrong I know I can get back to shore.

To extend the idea further does mean that we are moving into the area of trying things out and seeing what the boat can do.

It also does mean that problems will be discovered and hopefully overcome.

I think probably the most worthwhile step that augments what the boat is about is to increase the boats stability by reducing the weight of the mast. That's part of the reason for the square hollow and maybe the birdsmouth trims a bit off that - do we have any weights on a birdsmouth mast yet? A carbon stick would make an even bigger difference.

Another option might be to pull a bit of diameter out of the square mast to reduce it further. They really do seem very bulletproof - not a whisper of any problems.

The other main problem to overcome is the amount of water in the boat. Because of the minimal structure there is a lot of space for water to slosh around. Many boats of this size from the "wooden boat" movement don't even have buoyancy tanks. So the Goat is a bit ahead of the game there, but I would assume that any of those will be fitted with buoyancy bags at the least.

I do keep thinking about what do do about this, but I am so addicted to the lightness and simplicity (in building and in appearance) of the boat I am disinclined to complicate the interior.

That is disinclined ... I'm not banning anyone from trying things - though I am keen for them to follow the spirit of the boat.

So the question, I guess, is what can be achieved to increase the potential uses of the boat without meaning that you end up requiring quite a different sort of boat completely.

And also if there are changes to realistically test them so as to know they work when the going gets tough.

I hope this helps.

Best wishes
MIK

Originally Posted by Boatmik

Howdy,

It has proven to be more capable in many ways because it is quite controllable and because of the reefing.

I usually understood the safety factors of having another person aboard - one can make sure the boat stays upright, the other can fix whatever the problem is - bailing or trying to rethread the mainsheet or any of the other problems that occur from time to time. There is quite a big safety factor in having a second person.

MIK

I fully agree with MIK's message (it being quite long I only quoted above statements that I would like to further elaborate on):

- the boat is very controllable, also in bigger waves. No pressure at all on the rudder, it is very balanced (raising the dagger board a bit on a reach or when sailing downwind further increases this).
- I tend to reef early on my GIS in open waters. In other posts regarding open water sailing we have had discussions concerning another set of reef points between the bottom of the sail and the first set of reef points as on the sail as indicated on the sail drawing. In my experience it doesn't slow the boat down but rather makes it more controllable, faster and less prone to capsizing.
- The second person on board really helps: it is quite big for one person to handle easily if it starts blowing (much depends of course on ones experience and the particular rigging of the boat).

It will be interesting to see what the boxed in mid seat does for the water coming onboard in case of a capsize. Hopefully Watermaat finishes his GIS soon so we can test this and have some feedback for you.

Best regards,

Joost

Hi Mik and Joost, thanks for the feedback. I agree with all you are saying, don't worry I'm going to be quite conservative with any changes and use of the boat. Agree absolutely about the usefullness of a second person in the boat though sometimes my crew will be inexperienced, so I'm keen to have systems for haylard, downhall and reefing I can manage myself if necessary. There's some good information on the how reefing lugsail and lug rig heaven threads - thanks. Will be reefing and or deciding what conditions I'll go out in depending on experience and usefullness of crew as ballast.

Thoughts on construction mods are to only extend the middle seat (amount to be determined), and box it in to add buoyancy. Hopefully Watermaat will get his boat finished and can give me some feedback on the changes he has made.

Good information on the usefullness of a third reefing point and the added stability of a light mast. I was just looking at the price of a carbon mast Moth mast 1.3mm Standard modulus - Moth - Class Products - C Tech Ltd and it didn't seem as bad as I might have thought, especially when I factor in the price of spar oregon/epoxy needed and time to build - Mik can you give me an idea of the section specs I would need for a carbon mast, would the Moth mast section, 50mm ID/1.3 wall at the base, top section tapered be about right? I think Keyhavenpotter had carbon spars on a lug rig, perhaps he has the specs for his. C-Tech are the people who made the carbon tubes for my folding sea kayak frame, they're quite happy to vary the layup as necessary. Add a carbon yard and there'd be a big reduction in weight aloft. When you think about it, even with the hollow wooden mast, at least 20% of the boats weight is in the bits sticking up in the air to make it go.

Looking forward to some feedback once our Dutch friends get a couple of boats on the water alongside each other.

Thanks, Ian

Originally Posted by IanHowick

Thoughts on construction mods are to only extend the middle seat (amount to be determined), and box it in to add buoyancy. Hopefully Watermaat will get his boat finished and can give me some feedback on the changes he has made.

Hi Ian,

We are all very interested in that. It might be a while before the water is warm enough for him to do this safely. The boat is looking great though.

Good information on the usefullness of a third reefing point and the added stability of a light mast. I was just looking at the price of a carbon mast Moth mast 1.3mm Standard modulus - Moth - Class Products - C Tech Ltd and it didn't seem as bad as I might have thought, especially when I factor in the price of spar oregon/epoxy needed and time to build - Mik can you give me an idea of the section specs I would need for a carbon mast, would the Moth mast section, 50mm ID/1.3 wall at the base, top section tapered be about right? I think Keyhavenpotter had carbon spars on a lug rig, perhaps he has the specs for his. C-Tech are the people who made the carbon tubes for my folding sea kayak frame, they're quite happy to vary the layup as necessary. Add a carbon yard and there'd be a big reduction in weight aloft. When you think about it, even with the hollow wooden mast, at least 20% of the boats weight is in the bits sticking up in the air to make it go.

The moth mast won't be strong enough by a long distance - because it is unstayed.

I expect that you would need something around 75mm, maybe a bit less - the big problem is always availability of something the right size. This can be as much of a problem using aluminium spars - for example it is hard to find a stock aluminium tube the right diameter (approx 55 to to 62mm) for a single person unstayed mast in OZ.

Best wishes
MIK

Hi Mik, thanks for that, yes, I sat down and did the maths after my last post and round carbon tube 75mm ID/1.5mm wall is about the same stiffness as the square box section in Oregon at 82mm/52mm size. Are there any other issues with carbon versus timber other than making sure the stiffness is in the same ballpark as the original timber section?

Thanks, Ian

I shopped for a tapered aluminum mast with flagpole suppliers and found several that seemed suitable. I settled on a 17 foot stick with a 3 inch base tapering to 1 7/8 at the top. Wall thickness was more than enough (.125") but it still came in substantially less weight than the solid Oregon mast, about the same as the hollow box at 19-20 pounds. Once sealed up it floated just fine in a horizontal attitude with the tip 2/3rds submerged and the base 1/3rd submerged.

If you go looking at flagpoles keep in mind they give the size as the amount of pole above ground. Mine was called the 15 foot model but was 17 before I cut it.