cutter rig without runnng backstays?

[urisvan]

is it possible? cutter rig without running backstays?
cheers

[Dalliance]

new to forum/sight, but regarding your querry! if you have fwd and especially after shrouds and your staysail stay terminates at a point very near or at the point of attachment for you aft shrouds then you can get away with no running back stays. this is from an article i read recently, however you should understand that this is a dubious and taxing enterprize on the shrouds in storm conditions as shrouds are designed to keep a mast in column(ie) to stop it from pumping in heavy seas.

[MikeJohns]

Following on from what Dalliance (welcome) has said;

Yes it is often seen, Whether or not it is feasible depends on the stiffness of the mast and the rigging arrangement. The mast can be stiffened locally with jumper struts or such and often you will see shallower angle permanent "runners" as a compromise. More sensibly is that they are rigged only for heavy weather and a heavy enough mast section is used to make them unnecessary otherwise.

[alan white]

The elegant solution is possible with a marconi sail, and not with a gaffer, which is a sprit off the stern for a single backstay. I would never use runners if I could set up a backstay instead. I have a gaffer, a daysailer, and though the boat's not very big, she carries a lot of sail (180 sq ft, 15 ft length). I do get nervous off the wind when it's blowing hard, and this next season I plan on setting up runners. But if you can possibly use a backstay, it's so much better.

Alan

[PAR]

A boomkin is an option, as Alan suggests, though to me always a cobbled together sort of thing. Running backs are the best way to handle headsail loads and if your mast has a stiff enough section, then only necessary when the wind pipes up.

A re-design could yield a backstay free rig (fixed or running) or you could even go shroudless (free standing). Much depends on your goals, desires and the budget.

[alan white]

My thinking was that the backstay (terminating on the end of a boomkin) allows the aft shrouds to be positioned more adjacent to the mast--- this in turn allows the boom to swing perpendicular. Less fussing with a preventer and less chance of gybing, not to mention more sail area in most cases.
Also, most boats have a broad enough stern to mount a wide-stance V boom (with a single bobstay), which is a simple and reliable design. More reliable, I think, than a typical bowsprit due generally to being shorter.
I'll agree that the staying angle of a runner is ideal. Still, it's more work, since it won't stand a gybe unattended. And of course it's the only choice on a gaffer. A lot of no-comprimise world-cruising designs use boomkins with overhanging main booms. In the end, it comes down to personal preference, I guess. Nor is it a choice between two systems, since you can easily have both options at the same time.

A.

[urisvan]

thanks for quick replies,
Dalliance, i couldn't understand you clearly, it sound good, but can you explain me with a simple drawing, it will be magnificient.
and i read an article(at ted brewer's book) about intermediate backstays.
Dehler 41ds uses this kind of stay. what do you think about it
see you

[urisvan]

and thank you very much alan, i would be very glad if you explain it with a simple drawing.

[alan white]

See this Lyle Hess Bristol channel Cutter:

http://www.boats.com/news-reviews/di...ge.html?id=145

Note the short boomkin. I believe the boom is actually a vee (or A frame) mounted atop the after deck. Then a single bobstay goes from the boomkin-end down to close to the waterline on the stern.

[urisvan]

hi, alan
i couldn't open the link you posted. do you mean something like that(see the picture)
if so, it is not the answer that i am expecting. it is only a solution to install a backstay on a boat that has a long boom. it doesn't counteract the force on the inner forestay.

[urisvan]

i am confused, i quess i have a problem about jargon.
on the picture i posted, i show what i call "intermediate backstay". what do you call for it?
But, Dallience i quess you mean a diffirent solution. i did not understand your jargon. for example, what you mean by "after shroud", do you mean "lower shroud" or "backstay"? i think,a picture explain much more.
cheers

[alan white]

Yes, you're right. The picture you show is the exact same one I had, by the way.
It's true that the boomkin won't directly counteract the pull of the forestay.
What I said would apply more correctly to a sloop.
I did a conversion years ago, and I terminated the upper forestay end higher than the BCC rig in the picture, which attempts to be parallel to the jib. My mast was very stiff and the two headsails worked beautifully together------ especially when reaching. The upper attachment was maybe 30" below the masthead (24 ft luff). I don't believe the slot between the headsails needs to be parallel, and in my experience, the mast stayed in column (and the stays'l didn't sag) without the need for runners.
Much depends on mast stiffness, height of upper attachment, and size of stays'l relative to the mains'l. You can also install a set of forward swept jumper struts with their bases mounted at the stays'l attachment height.
A lot of factors would be considered. An offshore boat might go with a relatively stiff and heavy mast, backstay, and use runners. A go-fast inshore boat might have a light slender tapered mast and jumpers, but no runners.

[PAR]

There are a lot of names for the wires that hold up sailing rigs and terminology can be confusing. This is compounded by the differences of various parts of the world to use different terms for similar items.

Yes, you can have a cutter rig without running backs. You can also have the same rig without any backs, fixed to a boomkin or other wise.

These are decisions best sorted out by a skilled designer, as they are not easily arranged by a rigger with reliability. There are just too many variables and loads to wade through, then to make a shot from the hip.

Currently Hunter is marketing a full line of sailboats with the B&R backstay free rig. Yep, no back stay, no runners, just well swept spreaders, that rub the crap out of the sail.

[Cliff Pope]

I assumed that "after shrouds" meant the aft-most of normally 2 or perhaps 3 set permanently on the chain plates, each side of and slightly back from the mast? The position of the aft-most pair varies quite a lot, and the degree of aftness surely determines the relative need for additional backstays.
Working boats traditionally had their aft-most shroud further back than is now conventional on yachts, presumably to avoid needing to shift backstays as well as working fishing gear. The compromise was the boom was more restricted when running.
I think it was quite usual to have the running backstays fitted, but only to set them up in stronger winds.

[urisvan]

hi alan
what do you mean by "upper forestay?