Cutter Rig

[Robert Franklin]

My  P36 has a cutter stays'l rug that I dismantled years ago but am considering restoring.  The major factor in my decision to eliminate the stays'l option was the complicated running backstays the PO had installed. I found them rather cumbersome, but more than that I wondered if they were necessary given the robust quality of the mast on the 36, same I believe on the 10M (and perhaps the other Pearson models in the mid and upper 30 foot range.

If I understand the terminology correctly the "solent" rig has both forestays terminating at the top of the mast eliminating the forces that require running backstays.

My set up has a hoop that is to be bolted onto the mast open at the aft so as not to impede the mainsail sail track.  It attaches approximately 1/2 way between the spreaders and the top of the mast.  

This comes down to one question.

Do I really need running backs or is this just one more example on my particular boat of a prior owner's over abundance of caution?

I am having difficulty understanding the force dynamics of a cutter rig that creates the necessity of running back stays.

Bob Franklin

--

Robert M. Franklin, Esq.
145 Lagrange Street
Chestnut Hill, MA 02467-3047
617 277 5900 Cell
617 277 5901 Fax
email:  robertm...@gmail.com

[Dan Pfeiffer]

I would suggest curling up with "The Riggers Apprentice" by Brion Toss.  Lots of good discussion on these topics. 
Also "Understanding Rigs and Rigging" by Richard Henderson.

I think I would want the running backs as you have described the setup.   The Soundspar 8875 mast on the 36 was also used on the 10M, 419, and 424 so far as I know.   It is a very large section for a 33 or 36 footer.  But the single spreader configuration means some long UN-supported sections.

I have some rigging for an inner forestay on my 10M.  I installed a t-ball socket about 3 feet down from the top of the mast.  Still on the tapered part of the mast.  I have a 1/4" wire on the fitting that goes in this socket.  My plan was to rig a padeye on the foredeck a few feet aft of the stem.   No running backs as it was pretty close to the masthead and my rigger thought it would be fine without them given the beefy nature of the mast.  I would need some mechanism to disconnect the stay at the foredeck- maybe a highifield lever. 
https://theriggingco.com/2014/06/08/the-highfield-lever/
The plan was to rig this to fly a storm sail or maybe a sail a bit larger but still much smaller than a working jib.  It would hank to the inner stay and I would raise it with the spare jib halyard. And I was not intending to fly the inner sail with the headsail as you would with a cutter so no worries about the narrowing slot between the two as you move up and the trim difficulties that would probably lead to?  

I never completed setting this up and I am not sure it would be of much use for the sort of sailing I do.   I think I would look into doing this with a synthetic stay rather than the wire if I got back to it.   And I think I would want it if I planned to go offshore.  There are some photos of the fittings on this page:
http://dan.pfeiffer.net/10m/new_rigging.htm
They are not really very good but you can see the t-ball socket better right at the bottom in this photo:
http://dan.pfeiffer.net/10m/masthead_oem_20180911_133648-1.jpg

My intent was for flying a storm sail or a slightly larger heavy weather sail, not for running as a cutter rig.  That said, the J dimension on the 10M is proportionally large somewhat like a cutter.   Same is true for the 36 but to a lesser extent.  Look at the mainsail foot E dimension Vs the J dimension and compare that to the Pearson 36 Cutter (367).   Also look at main area Vs foretriangle area (M/F).   As a comparison the 36-2 is a more balanced rig sail plan and the 43 is more weighted towards the main. 

Pearson Data Tables:
http://dan.pfeiffer.net/pearsoninfo/info/pearsons.htm

But, there is more to a cutter rig than those dimensions - like the placement of the keel and the effect on lateral resistance.  And for all those boats the center of effort of the sail plan is made to properly balance with the center of lateral resistance of the hull/keel.  Add the inner sail and you're changing that balance.  However, typically with a cutter you would fly a yankee jib not a large overlapping genoa so that difference in center of effort needs to be considered as the combination of the two sails.  Point is, there's more to it than adding the rigging.   You can't just slap a cutter rig on a sloop and have a cutter.    Or maybe you can but it might present some odd handling characteristics - not unlike putting on a big bowsprit.  The P36 Cutter is a derivative of the P365.  But the keel and rudder were significantly modified.  That keel looks to have carried on to the P386 which also came in a cutter rig version.  The 386 was probably the pinnacle of the 365 derivatives.  Much higher performing than the 365.  So is the 36 cutter (367) at least if you look at PHRF ratings. 

So what is your purpose with the cutter rig?  If it's a place to fly a heavy weather sail with the jib furled you might be better off taking the inner stay up close to the masthead (within 4 feet or so?) and dispensing with the running backs and additional halyard gear.  Flying a heavy weather sail there will bring the center of effort in a bit and keep you from needing to go all the way to the bow to rig it.  But you still have to deal with rigging the stay unless you leave in permanently in place.    And there's no reason you couldn't.  You will just have to tack the genoa through the space forward of the inner stay.  If that stay is a dynema rope rather than a wire it's nice and slippery.  But you also probably need a way to tension the inner stay so that it be slacked and doesn't screw with the headstay tension when that inner sail is not used.   But it needs to be really tight to fly a stormsail properly. 

Lots to consider....That's where the fun is.

Dan Pfeiffer

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pearson-boats" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pearson-boat...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pearson-boats/CAODnOUYXX%2BX0xveB9XKcaHTXKeE%3D7%3DmGoKXCh%2BzEj%2BxZU%2BXznw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Robert Franklin]

I reviewed most of your material and photos.  Thanks for that.  

I think the first thing I need to do is get to my boat sometime when the temp is above 40 degrees and with binoculars redetermine at what point on the mast the original inner stay connects.  Everything else I have is based on that point.  I have an eye on the foredeck and a stay in the forepeak that takes the tension down to the stem.  I need to do more examining of my inventory including the sail that was planned for this inner forestay.  It is tensioned with the type of lever you refer to.

Although this was done by the interim owner, it appears there was some professional guidance involved.

As far as what I am trying to achieve.  I guess in truth I don't know beyond my thought of being able to reef the main, hand on a smaller jib and keep going in conditions more challenging that those I am able to handle with the Genoa rolled.  I did not anticipate there being as much technical to consider, as you have outlined.

Bob

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pearson-boats/6e26a30eab0804ab3c544b6167632771%40pfeiffer.net.

[Dan Pfeiffer]

Sounds like you have a similar idea of how you would use this setup for heavy weather as I had.   I had the same sort of deck padeye in mind with a tie rod to the center rib in the bow.  I think raising the mount on the mast to 4 or 5 feet below the masthead would eliminate the need for the running backs and let you use an existing jib halyard.  The t-ball fitting I have is simple and compact.  I don't see installing it with the mast up but maybe for a real rigger.  They make t-ball ends to connect to high-modulus line (like dynema). 

This is the t-ball terminal I have on the mast:
http://www.sailingservices.com/Rigging/Alexander-Roberts-T-Terminal-Backing-Plates/Backing-Plate-for-7-32-9-32-T-Ball.html

This is the fitting to use the t-ball with a dynema line for the stay:
http://www.sailingservices.com/Rigging/T-Rings/Alexander-Roberts-Company-TRB-8-T-Bolt-Ring-Eye-1-4-in.html

Here' an alternative to the highfield lever:
https://www.cruisingworld.com/forestay-solutions/


I have an idea for handling tension at the deck.  You have the deck padeye turned athwart-ship and the dynema has a cover for the last 10 feet or so?  It is passed through the padeye and led to the anchor windlass which has a drum winch that is used to tension the stay.  Then you cleat the tail to a bow cleat.  I attached a sketch.   All those components need to be properly beefy.  I think the windlass drum would be.  Not sure though.  The manual unit I have seems OK.  I see these inner stays done with a wichard folding padeye.  In 8mm they are specced at about 5200 lbs.  That is probably a good target for the strength of the components. 
https://marine.wichard.com/en/stainless-steel-hardware/fastenings/folding-pad-eyes/single/part-6605

There are a couple advantages to this arrangement as I see it.  The soft stay line can be secured to the mast like a halyard when not in use.  The hanked-on sail can be kept nice and low right at the deck (no highfield lever in the way), and you spare the expense of that relatively pricey component.  I think you could get enough tension on the line for it to work properly as a stay.   The deck padeye should be pretty big to give an easy turn to the dynema line.   And nicely polished.   I kind of prefer a fixed padeye rather than the folding ones.  I might consider making one so it has an over-sized diameter bail for an easier turn of the line.  I made a similar bail on the boom for my mainsheet from a 1/2" u-bolt.
http://dan.pfeiffer.net/10m/boom_bail_2_20200310_235739.jpg

Whatever the setup for this heavy weather sail it needs to be simple and easy to rig in ugly conditions.   The lever tensioners are easy to rig I think but  I don't know if the lever units (Highfield) can get the needed tension on a dynema stay.   The dynema is stronger than wire but there is more slack to be taken up.  Pre-stretching the dynema can help but that is a difference with dynema Vs wire in these sorets of applications. 


But then there is the reality of the use of this setup for the sailing you actually do. For me with my jib boom it might be more effective to switch to a smaller sail that is made to fit the boom and can roll up.  That would be very handy and there are certainly handling advantages to that but then I have to do a sail change on the roller and that is not so good in the conditions we are talking about.  There is also advantage to having the heavy weather sail more inboard especially if you want to be able to claw up-wind.  I have tried sailing with just my jib on the boom and it was not good.  The lee helm made tacking very difficult.  But that was a test in moderate conditions (10-14) just to see how it behaved.  With more power in higher winds it might be better.  Sailing with just a big genoa in 10-15 is fine.   But a heavy weather sail set inboard is going to be better if it can fly right with proper tension on the stay. 

If I were serious about going offshore the heavy weather sail makes sense.  But I might be down to just my double reefed main in the conditions we're talking about here (25-35?) and likely running for cover.  Might be more effective to have a deep third reef in the main and an easy way to set it?   I am considering a new main in a season or two and I will look into adding a mainsail track like this:
https://www.tidesmarine.com/sailtrack/intst_overview
These are supposed to make reefing easier by making the main easier to raise and lower under load.  But a main made with a deep third reef might need to be so heavy that you give up performance in the lighter air.   Is there much point in having a third reef if the fabric doesn't match the winds speeds you would use it in?  Then again modern fabrics are pretty amazing.  Maybe all that can work.  There is also to rigging of the reefing lines for a third reef.  It would maybe make sense to switch the 1st reef lines to the third when needed but once again you're looking at a difficult setup process in the conditions you would need it for.  And the need for these capabilities may not be particularly great for the sailing I actually do. 

Dan Pfeiffer

[john getz]

My P36 had an inner forestay that snapped to a car on a track on the foredeck, all installed by the PO. It fastened off to the port lowers when not in use. The tack car was tensioned by a tackle that went to the padeye for the spin pole downhaul block. At the time I had no furler, just the original Stearns Streamstay, a two track foil, so I could peel a headsail, always having one up. My #3 was a 100% that could be reefed up to almost a stormsail, and sheeted to the toerail track, and with a 3rd reef in the main I never felt the need for what seemed a questionable sized cutter in heavy weather. I pulled the foredeck track and, of course, many years later have the whole rig in my garage. There have been only a couple times when I wished I had the ability to hang that old #3, but haven't regretted the loss of all that extra hardware for the inner.

I would think running backstays overkill on that well-stayed, thick columned, mast.

John Getz

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pearson-boats" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pearson-boat...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pearson-boats/82ba36eb3d30eb504fc3a73cd489dfe6%40pfeiffer.net.

[David Lidrbauch]

I like this idea

so, in heavy weather I've often been clawing to windward.

what changes did/would you make for a tighter sheeting angle?   the existing lead angles from that new clew location would be useless.

DaveL

-David Lidrbauch

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pearson-boats" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pearson-boat...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pearson-boats/82ba36eb3d30eb504fc3a73cd489dfe6%40pfeiffer.net.

[Jeff Griglack]

My P365 has a removable solent setup that should have a bale attachment about 1 - 2 feet back from the forestay.  The PO removed the bale because he felt it interfered with the windlass he had installed and because he never used it.  I am reinstalling the bale so I can use it.  The solent stay attaches to a halyard that is a couple feet down from the top of the mast.  Because the attachment point is so high up, there is no need for secondary or running back stays (that, and the fact that the ketch rig has a lot of support already with a both a regular back stay and a triatic stay).

Again, like Dan, I expect to use the solent to fly a smaller storm sail.

Jeff

------------------------------------------------------------------
| Jeff Griglack             "Jabberwocky" P-365 #269

------------------------------------------------------------------
| "Don't take life so serious, son, it ain't nohow permanent"
|                   - Walt Kelly
| 'Years ago my mother used to say to me, she'd say, "In this
| world, Elwood, you must be" – she always called me Elwood –
| "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant."
| Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. You may quote me.'
|               —James Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd
------------------------------------------------------------------

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "pearson-boats" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to pearson-boat...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pearson-boats/CAODnOUYXX%2BX0xveB9XKcaHTXKeE%3D7%3DmGoKXCh%2BzEj%2BxZU%2BXznw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Dan Pfeiffer]

To be clear I never finished setting any of this up so I don't know how it would actually behave.   I would probably put some stand up blocks on the side deck inboard of the fwd shrouds.  Right at the side of the cabin.  That would get you about 11.5 deg sheeting angle which is right in the ball park.  I would lead from the standup blocks back through the genoa cars and then to the winches.  I made a drawing of the envisioned setup on my 10M with dbl reefed main and 100sf heavy weather jib on the inner stay (a proper storm jib is more like 65sf).  The geometry looks like it works pretty well regarding sheeting angles and lead so I would think it would balance well.   Off the wind the inboard lead would make for poor jib shape but in as much wind as this would be rigged for (30-35?)  I don't think it would matter?  Certainly not enough to go out and move it top the rail?   But as Dave suggested the leads to the rail would be useless for any hope of going upwind.  


Dan Pfeiffer

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/pearson-boats/CA%2BvS7vFRqEdkfwJKw51FFd8UdkBFqRdVs0ZdugkRTwnfonHkGA%40mail.gmail.com.