Gybing a Spinnaker
beryl
with an inner forestay/babystay.
A present I do end for end within the inner forestay but have to
disconnect and reconnect the pole topping lift fore it is attached
to the mast above the attachment for the inner forestay.
Why is it attached above rather than below the inner forestay or
where am I going wrong?
Beryl
Psi-Man
news:3E22A4D2...@ntlworld.com...
I am not quite sure of the set up here as I have only used a kite on a
single forestay boat. I have made some assumptions, so you'll have to
forgive me and correct me if this isn't how you rig the kite.
1) you run all your lines outside everything as u would do on a single
foresail boat
2) when you launch u bring kite either out of a pulpit bag or feed under
both sails and out, then drop both sails
3) when u retrieve you hoist both sails and then bring the kite under both
sails.
4) when u gybe u release uphaul, move it round inner forestay, reattach to
pole, release the guy, drop the foresail sheets, remove pole from mast
(tightening uphaul as you do to take strain), put the new sheets on the
pole, attach new guy.
A lot to assume so forgive me if it is wrong, that's just how I think I
would do it.
Without knowing how this is rigged I can only advise that you end-to-end
between the 2 forestays, move the topping lift, or run a second topping lift
which is lazy on the opposite gybe and do a dip pole gybe. The last one
being the most elegant one.
I would be interested to know how you do this, and how far out I am...
Cheers
Simon
Chris Lowe
There are a couple of quite good articles on spinnaker handling in this
and last months sailing today
chris
Stefan Lloyd
mast height to stop the mast inverting and to help induce pre-bend. Boats
that dip-pole gybed usually had a block-and-tackle arrangement so that the
baby-stay could be temporarily disconnected for the gybe, then re-attached
and tightend. If my memory serves, a lot of OOD34's had that setup, for
example.
You don't say what height your inner forestay attaches, but the height of
the pole uphaul sheave is not critical. Around 2/3 mast height is typical.
You may not find it easy to move the sheave without taking the mast down - I
had to last time I change a sheave.
"beryl" <beryl....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:3E22A4D2...@ntlworld.com...
matt colie
If the boat does not have the mentioned capability to pull the babystay
back to the mast, then the best way that I have seen is to revise the
gybe. It may take an extra man, but you can swing the pole through
forward of the babystay. The real difficulty is back aft; they have to
be very aware that the foredeck has to have time to get back to the mast
after the clew is released.
Matt Colie A.Sloop "Bonne Ide'e" S2-7.9 #1
Lifelong Waterman, Licensed Mariner and Perpetual Sailor
Ed Fryer
If it works for you, then who are we to tell you what to do?
Anyway a few thoughts on gybing with a babystay.
Methods:
1) Twin poles. Most trad (until the crew of the American 12 metre
(Vim?)invented the dip pole gybe). The second pole is rigged, the boat
gybed, the first pole then taken off. Downside: takes time, needs two
poles (on dedicated tracks) etc. Upside is that there is limited
possibility of things getting out of hand. The kite is never flying
without a pole.
2)Removing the babystay. If the babystay has a wheel tensioner and
quick-release pelican clip or similar, it is easy enough to release it
from the deck fitting, gybe the pole, pass the babystay over the pole
and re-attach. I've dip-pole gybed using this method. It's not as fast
as dip-pole gybing without a babystay, but not too bad. If your rigger
thinks it might work, you could rig a block and tackle instead of the
screw-tensioner. Not pretty, but much faster to tension.
3) As you do, remove the pole uphaul from the pole. Never tried this,
but I can imagine that you can find yourself with your hands full as
you try to pass the uphaul around the babystay, reattach it and then
push the pole out and clip it on.
4) Walk the end of the pole around the babystay. I really wouldn't
want to try this: strolling around the foredeck with one end of a
spinnaker pole, the other end of which is attached to a spinnaker
would not be my idea of a Good Thing.
Pole uphauls haul the pole up (Well, duh!). Therefore, the higher the
sheave, the greater the angle between pole and uphaul, and the more
effective the uphaul. On some boats, the pole uphaul sheve is a few
inches below the jib halyard sheave.
-Edward
The_navigator©
Cheers MC
Dennis Pogson
news:3E231A97...@excite.com...
If yours doesn't have one, then fit it!
Stefan Lloyd
"Dennis Pogson" <dennis...@ntlworld.com> wrote in message news:BOQU9.470
Psi-Man
news:b00n0t$rt7$1$8300...@news.demon.co.uk...
quick question, is an inner forestay fore just extra support of the mast or
will u hoist a sail on it?
Cheers
Simon
Graham Frankland
> Inner forestays should have a quick release attachment for downwind
sailing. If yours doesn't have one, then fit it!
>
you did detach it, try explaining to insurers why they should pay out after
you modified the rig and broke the mast.
Easiest way is to move the sheeve down below the baby stay fitting then the
pole can be end-for-ended without problems. The more expensive option as
someone already suggested is to rig 2 poles.
Graham.
beryl
>
> beryl wrote:
I have not seen the articles in Sailing Today but have seen the
recent articles in Yacthing Monthly where they gloss over the
implications of a inner forestay.
Do the articles in the Sailing Today cover this aspect more fully.
Regards Beryl
beryl
quick question, is an inner forestay fore just extra support of the
mast or
will u hoist a sail on it?
Cheers
Mast support
Beryl
beryl
>news:3E22A4D2...@ntlworld.com...
>
>> What is the procedure for gybing a symmetrical spinnaker on a
>> boat with an inner forestay/babystay. A present I do end for
>> end within the inner forestay but have to disconnect and
>> reconnect the pole topping lift fore it is attached to the
>> mast above the attachment for the inner forestay. Why is it
>> attached above rather than below the inner forestay or where
>> am I going wrong?
>>
>> Beryl
>
> It used to be common for boats to have a baby-stay connected at
> around 1/3 mast height to stop the mast inverting and to help
> induce pre-bend. Boats that dip-pole gybed usually had a
> block-and-tackle arrangement so that the baby-stay could be
> temporarily disconnected for the gybe, then re-attached and
> tightend. If my memory serves, a lot of OOD34's had that setup,
> for example.
>
> You don't say what height your inner forestay attaches, but the
> height of the pole uphaul sheave is not critical. Around 2/3
> mast height is typical. You may not find it easy to move the
> sheave without taking the mast down - I had to last time I
> change a sheave.
>
Yes the baby-stay is about 1/3 of the way up the mast and the pole
uphaul a little below halfway.
The mast is down at present for we are re-rigging so yes it will be
easier but still something of a job as the halyards are internal to
the mast and I have yet to find a source for a double through block
suitable for 12mm rope that can be fitted to the mast from the
outside most are intended to be fitted from inside and it is assumed
trying to get the foot off the mast will be a PIG....
But going back to the original question why is it most of the uphaul
attachments are fitted above the baby-stay, are we missing something
for as you say it is not critical, for the loading is really only
the weight of the pole.
beryl
Stefan Lloyd
look at a way of temporarily detached the babystay instead. Ideally, find a
friendly rigger to discuss it with.
"beryl" <beryl....@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:3E242A44...@ntlworld.com...
The_navigator©
slack when going downwind when the mainsail offers almost no drive with the
spnny up. Hence it can be safely detached for the period required to gyle the
boat.
OK?
Cheers MC
The_navigator©
wondering, I actually have have a cruising masthead rig with detachable baby
stay and I fly spinnakers (and gennakers). It takes no more than 3 seconds to
undo and redo the baby stay and it should under no tension down wind anyway
with the backstay eased. The rig goes forward and is controlled by the check
stays or runners.
Cheers MC
The_navigator©
Cheers MC
beryl
>> What is the procedure for gybing a symmetrical spinnaker on a
>> end within the inner forestay but have to disconnect and
>> mast above the attachment for the inner forestay. Why is it
>> attached above rather than below the inner forestay or where
>> am I going wrong?
>>
> If it works for you, then who are we to tell you what to do?
>
At present to gybe, the pole topping lift is slackened,
disconnected, walked around the inner forestay, reattached to the
pole and retensioned.
Pole is disconnected from the mast and attached to the lazy guy.
The other end of the pole is freed from the guy and attached to the
mast.
The sail is then trimmed including taking up the pole topping lift.
The pole downhaul is attached at the foot of the mast so unless
there is a reset of the spinnaker pole height it is not disturbed.
> Anyway a few thoughts on gybing with a babystay.
>
> Methods:
>
> 1) Twin poles. Most trad (until the crew of the American 12 metre
> (Vim?)invented the dip pole gybe). The second pole is rigged, the
> boat gybed, the first pole then taken off. Downside: takes time,
> needs two poles (on dedicated tracks) etc. Upside is that there
is > limited possibility of things getting out of hand. The kite is
> never flying without a pole.
>
Twin poles have their attraction as I normally sail short handed
with not a particularly strong crew. The storage of one pole yet
alone two is enough of a problem yet alone two. If the spinnaker was
used more it might be different.
> 2)Removing the babystay. If the babystay has a wheel tensioner and
> quick-release pelican clip or similar, it is easy enough to
> release it from the deck fitting, gybe the pole, pass the
babystay > over the pole and re-attach. I've dip-pole gybed using this
> method. It's not as fast as dip-pole gybing without a babystay,
> but not too bad. If your rigger thinks it might work, you could
> rig a block and tackle instead of the screw-tensioner. Not
pretty, > but much faster to tension.
>
Would this give any great gain or are we exchanging one additional
operation for a another, what is considered the advantages in
removing the babystay and dip-poling over end for end if the pole
fittings allow for end for end.
> 3) As you do, remove the pole uphaul from the pole. Never tried
> this, but I can imagine that you can find yourself with your
hands > full as you try to pass the uphaul around the babystay,
re-attach
> it and then push the pole out and clip it on.
>
Yes hands are full dependent on the motion of the boat particularly
in light wind trying to support the pole whilst re-routing its
topping lift. Which reading the article in Yachting Monthly prompted
my original question.
> 4) Walk the end of the pole around the babystay. I really wouldn't
> want to try this: strolling around the foredeck with one end of a
> spinnaker pole, the other end of which is attached to a spinnaker
> would not be my idea of a Good Thing.
>
At 4.2 metre 12.4 kg I agree.
> Pole uphauls haul the pole up (Well, duh!). Therefore, the higher
> the sheave, the greater the angle between pole and uphaul, and
the > more effective the uphaul. On some boats, the pole uphaul
sheve is > a few inches below the jib halyard sheave.
>
I cannot appreciate any reason for the pole uphaul to go nearly to
to the top of the mast apart from to act as a spare jib halyard.
As for the sheeting angle this is never that great being effectively
connected to the centre of the pole for end to end.
Beryl
Ed Fryer
Edward wrote:
> disconnected, walked around the inner forestay, reattached to the
> pole and retensioned.
> Pole is disconnected from the mast and attached to the lazy guy.
> The other end of the pole is freed from the guy and attached to the
> mast.
> The sail is then trimmed including taking up the pole topping lift.
> The pole downhaul is attached at the foot of the mast so unless
> there is a reset of the spinnaker pole height it is not disturbed.
> > Anyway a few thoughts on gybing with a babystay.
> >
> > Methods:
> >
> > 1) Twin poles. Most trad (until the crew of the American 12 metre
> > (Vim?)invented the dip pole gybe). The second pole is rigged, the
> > boat gybed, the first pole then taken off. Downside: takes time,
> > needs two poles (on dedicated tracks) etc. Upside is that there
> is > limited possibility of things getting out of hand. The kite is
> > never flying without a pole.
> >
>
> Twin poles have their attraction as I normally sail short handed
> with not a particularly strong crew. The storage of one pole yet
> alone two is enough of a problem yet alone two. If the spinnaker was
> used more it might be different.
Yes, one of the reasons it's now rare. Add to that weight (on racing
boats), windage, and the fact that it's a slower way to gybe than
dipping the pole. As a generalisation, found on big boats cruising
where you have room to store the poles, and don't want to dip
(multiple forestays, short-handed crew).
> > 2)Removing the babystay. If the babystay has a wheel tensioner and
> > quick-release pelican clip or similar, it is easy enough to
> > release it from the deck fitting, gybe the pole, pass the
> babystay > over the pole and re-attach. I've dip-pole gybed using this
> > method. It's not as fast as dip-pole gybing without a babystay,
> > but not too bad. If your rigger thinks it might work, you could
> > rig a block and tackle instead of the screw-tensioner. Not
> pretty, > but much faster to tension.
> >
>
> Would this give any great gain or are we exchanging one additional
> operation for a another, what is considered the advantages in
> removing the babystay and dip-poling over end for end if the pole
> fittings allow for end for end.
Personally, I wouldn't swap to dipping, rather than end-for-ending
unless you have to: it requires more coordination among the crew, and
(among other things) makes it easier to poke the pole through the
kite. Generally, you dip on boats that are too large to end-for-end:
it allows you to have dedicated ends to the spinnaker poles, and keeps
the pole attached to the mast, which makes life easier with a heavy
pole.
What I'm suggesting, is adjusting your babystay so you can temporarily
remove it, but stay with end-to-end gybing. The advantage of removing
the babystay is that it makes your life a bit easier. While running -
especially in light/medium winds, the babystay isn't really doing too
much: it's more useful to stop the mast pumping when beating stronger
wind and bigger waves, and to stop the mast inverting (also when
reaching with the spinnaker up).
To gybe like this, the sequence would be: undo babystay, temporarily
attach to (say) shroud (just somewhere to put it). Unclip spinnaker
pole from mast, clip to lazy guy, push across, unclip old guy, attach
to pole to mast. Then, at your leisure, unclip babystay from shroud,
pass over pole, reattach and tension.
The only time you really have to be at all quick (in terms of mast
safety) about re-attaching the babystay is when you're going to come
up onto a reach. Without mast pre-bend to avoid inversion, the
babystay is required. I'm assuming here you have a masthead rig with
straight, rather than swept spreaders.
By doing it like this, at least the pole is supported at all times by
the uphaul.
> Yes hands are full dependent on the motion of the boat particularly
> in light wind trying to support the pole whilst re-routing its
> topping lift. Which reading the article in Yachting Monthly prompted
> my original question.
Which is the advantage of unclipping the babystay. I've done this with
a pelican hook and screw-and-wheel tensioning system, and it's fine.
However, should you need speed (basically, racing), you can just have
a 6:1 (say) block and tackle. However, this doesn't necessarily look
pretty, and might foul deck-sweeping jibs/genoas while tacking: you
need your bowman to make sure tacks are clean.
> At 4.2 metre 12.4 kg I agree.
>
> > Pole uphauls haul the pole up (Well, duh!). Therefore, the higher
> > the sheave, the greater the angle between pole and uphaul, and
> the > more effective the uphaul. On some boats, the pole uphaul
> sheve is > a few inches below the jib halyard sheave.
> >
>
> I cannot appreciate any reason for the pole uphaul to go nearly to
> to the top of the mast apart from to act as a spare jib halyard.
> As for the sheeting angle this is never that great being effectively
> connected to the centre of the pole for end to end.
Basically, the higher the pole uphaul, the lower tension it needs to
be under to support the pole. There must always be 12.4kg of "upward"
force. The more horizontal the pole uphaul (i.e, the lower the
sheave), the more tension is required to provide that force.
For your pole, for example: If, say, the uphaul sheave was 30cm above
the pole (daft, but to illustrate), then you would have to tension the
pole uphaul to 87kg. Of that, just 12.4 is "supporting" the pole, with
the rest just pulling the pole towards the mast, compressing it. -
the ratio of the sides of the triangle of pole/uphaul/mast is 1(on the
mast), 7 (2.1/0
3) (along the pole), 7.07 (pole uphaul - pythogoras). With the 1
having to be a force of 12.4kg, the tension of the uphaul is
7.07*12.4=87.
However, if the pole uphaul sheave is 10 metres above the pole, then
only 12.6kg of tension is required.
The thing to do here is talk to a professional rigger. Advice on
usenet is generally worth what you've paid for it; and I guess you
don't want your mast to fall down!
-Edward
Chas
<edward...@hotmail.com> writes
>What I'm suggesting, is adjusting your babystay so you can temporarily
>remove it, but stay with end-to-end gybing. The advantage of removing
>the babystay is that it makes your life a bit easier. While running -
>especially in light/medium winds, the babystay isn't really doing too
>much: it's more useful to stop the mast pumping when beating stronger
>wind and bigger waves, and to stop the mast inverting (also when
>reaching with the spinnaker up).
>
to a car on a short track running fore and aft in front of the mast. The
babystay is set such that moving the car forward with a tackle, the tail
of which is led aft applies the necessary tension. Bungee cord is used
to pull the car aft when the tackle is released. When the kite goes up,
the cockpit crew loosen the forward pull tackle and the stay comes aft
and out of the way (more or less). Once the kite is back down and the
pole out of the way the car is then pulled forward thus tensioning the
baby stay for heading back upwind. Obviously it can be pulled off and on
for spinnaker reaching should that be necessary. The babystay is
redundant downwind and the backstay should be slackened off then too to
allow the masthead to go a bit forward. In this way the baby stay is
never actually disconnected.
Chas