Why do people keep on claiming that sailors are conservative about rigs?

[CT249]

It was more of a general comment, Brian. However, your post is an example of incorrect facts being used to denigrate other people.

The specific examples you give are examples of logic, not conservatism. Cascade was a very slow 37 footer that just happened to rate extraordinarily low due to a rule loophole. There were two alternatives - one, scrap lots of existing boats and replace them with much slower craft; two, change the rules. It was NOT "conservatism" to stop people having to buy much slower boats!

Mother nature's rule showed that Cascade was actually slow. It was only a loophole that made her look fast. To complain because rules make boats slower and then to champion one of the slowest rulebeaters of all seems to be rather illogical. Cascade's rating was adjusted because it was not logical to allow a boat to sail through a loophole in a rule that encouraged boats that were even slower than the standard yachts of the day. That is logic, not conservatism.

I haven't been able to find as much information about Hawkeye. However, there are some references that state that the King bilgeboarders were dangerously low in ultimate stability. Mother ocean's rule would surely demand that we do NOT reward boats that will stay upside down. It is not conservatism to discourage boats that are more likely to kill people.

Finally, it is completely false to claim that long battens were foreign to "traditionalists" within the period of handicap rules. Long battens were used by racing canoes in the 19th century. They were dropped because in the technology of the time they were often slower and more hassle than sails with no battens or short battens. They were used by Renjollen, Hornets, Vee Jays, Diamonds, Gwens and other classes long before they became de rigeur in multis.

It's apparent that you think you are just the smartest kid on the block, but there IS doubt as to the superiority of long battens. That is why they didn't become universal, and why some of the latest popular classes in dinghies don't use them.

The factual basis on which you make your allegation of conservatism is incorrect. Therefore the claim is also probably incorrect. It can also be said that your claims basically consist of saying "they were wrong, I am right". When you say there is no doubt about the superiority of full battens, for example, you are putting yourself on a lofty pedestal from which you are sneering at people like the guys behind RS Sailboats, who design outstanding new boats without full battens and do so for very good reasons. It's odd that it seems so hard for some people to just respect other sailors and the reasons they choose their craft.

Finally, if people were so conservative, why do so many of them make the "leap" from the freestanding non-bermudan rigs so many of them learned to sail on, into bermudan rigs? If people are so conservative why are there so many different rigs among the popular small craft?

 

[Richard Woods]

Many years ago I raced in a major offshore race with a mixed fleet of monohulls and multihulls. One of the monohulls had an unstayed modified junk rig with wrap round sails. The owner was bragging before the race how the rig was so efficient he would win easily. On the first leg he came dead last (I won). On the second leg his mast broke.

One major advantage of the conventional stayed rig is that it is easy to tune the rig to the sail. Another is that the sailmaker does most of the sail shape work, the more corners of a sail you have, and the greater the number of sails, the more skillful the sailors have to be to get them all drawing properly.

One major problem with the unstayed rig is that the mast manufacturer has to make the mast exactly right first time. Otherwise it maybe too stiff or too flexible. Easy for a production boatyard to experiment, especially on dinghy sizes. That was a major problem for the D0 at first, Devoti had to spend a lot of money making various masts before getting it right. Laser even had problems with their metal masts. Less easy to do for one offs. I have seen many too flexible or too stiff

BTW last winter I sailed a Freedom 45 with unstayed mast, a Sunfish ditto, and a Bahamian Class a sloop, ditto

There is a tendency for people to say "the old ways are best" which is a depressing thought for the human race. But also the old ways often were actually the best way with the technology available at the time. Back in the days of wood masts, battens and cotton sails few were able to get a fully battened sail to work properly. Now its no problem, except that the sail is never as flexible, so harder to read" in light winds. So a full battened head and "soft" bottom is often still a good compromise

Richard Woods of Woods Designs

www.sailingcatamarans.com

 

[brian eiland]

....
It's apparent that you think you are just the smartest kid on the block, ....

I'm not saying anything like that at all,...I'm just trying to point out a few 'technologies' that didn't seem to get a chance to progress further due to 'rules and handicap modifications'.

I don't have the time nor inclination to look up many other examples that other folks have brought up both in the past and up to present.

I'm glad there are not as many restrictive rules in place for the design of those big multihulls that are racing around the world and across the oceans for ever new record times.

 

[Richard Woods]

Most boatyards these days are run by accountants, not designers or builders. So it is no surprise that innovation is stifled by those holding the purse strings and who have no imagination. Thus many boats look the same, the boring AWB. Its the same with cars of course, and can you tell the difference between an Airbus and a Boeing?

Actually there are restrictions on race boats, mainly to control costs. The Volvo is now 1D for example

RW

 

[brian eiland]

Procyon, a BOLD experiment

BTW, here is an example of a bold new experiment that was carried out while ignoring the current handicap rules existing at her time.

Thanks for opening the thread on PROCYON and it was interesting to listen to some of the comments. By the way I am trying to find the boat and hope a reader has seen it and will let me know.

For those that are questioning the project and results I can only say that this project was designed to test new ideas since America was significantly behind Europe in innovative designs. We were not out to prove that a bi-pod mast or a canting keel or the other ideas were better, but to increase our knowledge to make sailing easier, faster, safer and more fun. It was an industry effort with a great core team and dozens of contributors of equipment. In general we were very pleased with the results, but certainly would make some changes if we did it again.

Here is a brief analysis of some of the main features..... more here:
http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/sailboats/procyon-project-bold-experiment-10771-3.html#post112067

 

[rob denney]

Have you done this on another boat then a proa ? I have a small unstayed unirig (lateen) boat, and if I let the sail weathercock downwind and sheet in a bit, the boat is uncontrolable because of the CE of the sail being way too far in front. The nose of the boat is forced sideways. Only when I sheet in till the sail is "squared" (is that English ?) the boat is controlable again.
I can imagine this would also be true on a bigger boat with aerorig, maybe to a lesser extent because of the balancing force of the jib......

Just curious.

Cheers, Hans

Interesting. I have done it on cats and proas and read about it on a mono, but can't remember wher. (uMaybe Mike Storer's Goat Us skiff?) All worked. Some unstayed rig boats also sail very heavily by the lee, with the main at 120 degrees or more without problems.

One of the noticable things about the aero rig is that with a large roach main, the leech area of the mainsail fills first when the sail is sheeted on, which gives strong weather helm. Not a problem if the helmsman is aware of it, but it can catch novices unawares. It can also be fixed by applying some topping lift to bend the mast and open the leech, but this is an extra job.

Maybe this is happening with the lateen, which also has a lot of area aft and no way to move the coe forward? It would be even worse if the mast was in the bow vs in the middle on a proa or ~ 1/3rd aft on a cat.
What do you use for leeway resistance?

The solution (with a una rig) if you had to gybe in a squall would be to let the sheet run and the sail weathercock, then head up slightly before sheeting in so the forces were more aligned.

Even if you can't sail with the sail out the front, it will still be a lot safer to put it there in a squall and either wait for it to pass, or reef it.

Barra,
It does not include those masts (we broke 2 of them) , nor the ones I have broken since. Read my post about poor design or build causing masts to break. These (and a whole lot of other bits and pieces like rudders, sails, hulls and beams) were all for me and part of developing lighter boats with easier build techniques.
There has been some progress on both fronts. The first big carbon mast I built was in steel moulds, with high pressure (105 psi/7 atm) and heat (105C/220F). A similar one now would weigh about half as much and be built with neither moulds, mandrels or special equipment.

Chris,
I don't follow your reasoning on psychology as it applies to rig choice, and don't care enough to argue about it. If you can't see that if the variety of rig choices in dinghies = non conservatism, then the lack of variety in cruising rigs = conservatism, we can agree to disagree.

I was not having a go at you, nor do I care whether you consider yourself "conservative" or not. I admire your work, and have changed some of my attitudes due to your research and reasoning. However, when you get away from this, you do say some silly things. One of them was "supposed reduced maintenance of freestanding rigs".

To more important things:

1- the 30 footer Uno lost her mast in (IIRC) a Delta race; and
2 - it looks like a 39 also lost a stick; "later in life I went from a Cal 20 to an Aphrodite 101, and then to my current boat of 10 years, a Wyliecat 39. In July I loaned boat to a friend - he raced it and broke about 70 feet worth of carbon fiber mast - ouch."

So what happened to just one of them breaking? We are now looking at 1 in 15 rigs breaking, from (I assume) 17 footers to 44s or whatever, most of which probably spend most of their time inshore. So the initial claim of one rig lost very soon appears to be incorrect. So is 2 lost masts in 30 boats actually any better than the record of "conventional" rigs? Can you give us evidence that more than 1/15th of a group of boats comparable to the Wyliecat have dropped sticks?

Dynamite arithmetic! There are 30+ Wylie cat 30's. Uno's mast had a row of holes where they should not have been and flew a spinnaker on a mast not designed for it and the mast fell down. Including that in the list is like including suicides in murder statistics. There are probably a couple of hundred Wylie boats altogether. One of them (not a 30) lost it's mast in circumstances you couldn't be bothered to check on. From this, you calculate that 2 masts in 30 have broken!
Add this to your silly statements list.

I am pretty certain you will find that there was a reason why the 39 mast broke. And this reason will be poor build, poor design (both unlikely as Ted van Deusen is one of the best), unengineered aftermarket add ons (like Uno), or using it outside it's design envelope. The boat had been raced for 10+ years, including a race to Hawaii and back.

What you don't seem to understand, or are avoiding, is that it is not possible for correctly designed, built and set up stayed or unstayed masts to fail in their designed use. Trite, but true.

The problem is that it is possible, even easy, to set up a stayed rig incorrectly and that, because they have so many constituent parts, there is more scope for things to wear out (corrosion, cracks, misalignment, excessive loads, etc). Neither of these applies to an unstayed mast. Hence the stayed mast requires more maintenance.

I look forward to your surveyors, etc (none of whom you reference, which is not your normal style) putting in writing that 5 year old, well used rigging is safe for offshore.
You also did not say how often you, or your "experts" think standing rigging should be replaced on a well used cruising boat?

Your examples of wonderful women sailors are the exceptions that prove the rule. You do your credibility a disservice by ignoring the reality that the majority of cruising wives would like less stress in their sailing.

The same applies to your 30' racing tri example, which I suspect may not be typical of most cruisers experience.

If you find issues (one of which was replacing the rigging every 5 years) that most cruisers see as serious to "not be significant", those cruisers will give less weight to the other things you say.

Your consideration that the problems are not significant would seem to counter your claim that you "don't like the standard multi rig". What is it that you don't like about it?

 

[CT249]

Rob;

Thanks for your kind words. Sometimes I do say things here with the aim of stirring discussion or presenting a possible alternative point of view.

Re Wyliecats; you didn't limit your claim to 30 footers in any way, explicitly or implicitly. Nor am I under any obligation to carry out a full investigation into the loss of the 39's rig, since it proves that your claim was incorrect or incomplete and therefore maybe I am not the only one making "silly statements".

Personally, I like freestanding masts (although I don't think they are the best for all purposes) and (from what I can see of them) Wyliecats. However the point is that while it is quite likely that they are more reliable, there doesn't seem to be objective evidence to that effect. Okay, the Wyliecat 30 seems to have a good record - but is it BETTER than the dismasting record of (say) Northshore 38s, which aren't a boat I particularly like but which don't seem to drop rigs very often? Is the Wyliecat 30's rate of mast loss less than that of Contessa 32s or X99s or some other group of yachts? Furthermore, when we assess the losses of conventional rigs, we'd have to discount those that have been poorly modified, as in the case of Uno.

When there has been no such examination of comparable groups with different rig types, there is no conclusive objective evidence that one type has superior failure rates.

It is untrue to claim that I am "ignoring the reality" of cruising wives. I am reflecting what I have been told by the two experienced cruising wives I have discussed rig design with. I didn't make any blanket claim about the majority of them. I am not going to make any declarations about what the ones I haven't discussed rigs with think about them. On the other hand, the views of one of the most experienced cruising women in the world are of interest IMHO.

I don't like the standard cruising multi rig you mention for several reasons, including that I find the squaretop mains ON CRUISING BOATS often choke (in the light) or twist too much (in a breeze), the gust response is poor, and overall rig weight appears to be very heavy. I'd personally probably prefer one of your rigs. However, that is MY personal taste and nothing more - it's just like the fact that I prefer sauvignon blanc to chardonnay, Formula 18 cats to Skiffs, and track cycling to crits. Similarly, if owners of big cats find that the "standard rig" suits their sailing that's great.

The fact that we all have personal preferences is why your list of issues associated with the "conventional" rigs is not a list of objective reasons why such rigs are inferior. It is merely one person's own list of issues that have to be traded off against other people's personal list of issues. If someone gives a different list or a different weighting to those trade-offs it is not proof that they are "conservative", it may simply show that they have different personal tastes and preferences. You dismiss the issue of bias, but it's something that scientists and other professionals accept as something we all have, and along with personal preferences it must influence the weighting that people - including you and I - give to various factors in rig design.

I am dubious about claims that cruisers are "conservative" in their rig choice, since they very act of moving onto a small boat and going cruising is a very unusual one. Obviously one can be conventional in some areas while still being a cruiser, but it seems that they are not a particularly conservative group of people.

Small boat rigs are relevant because it may indicate sailors in general are not conservative about rig choice. They often move happily from unstayed sprit cat rig (Opti) to unstayed bermudan cat rig (Laser) or spinnaker fractional sloop rig (420/Cadet/FJ etc) and then often to jib-and-main fractional sloop (Snipe/Tasar/Ent) and then to masthead big-boat rig. They have often demonstrated that they ARE willing to change rigs several times in their sailing career, therefore there is room to doubt that the same people suddenly become conservative when they move to bigger boats.

Finally, when my family first bought a cruising cat, the vast majority of them were probably Prout-style rigs, or conventional masthead rigs with in-line spreaders. Now, as you say, a very different rig is standard on multis. This change in multi rigs (as technology has changed ) seems to bely the conservatism charge.


PS - I've experienced the issue Zilver writes about, when I've accidentally let an over-length Laser mainsheet go out too far. A similar issue can be experienced with windsurfer rigs.

 

[CT249]

I'm not saying anything like that at all,...I'm just trying to point out a few 'technologies' that didn't seem to get a chance to progress further due to 'rules and handicap modifications'.

I don't have the time nor inclination to look up many other examples that other folks have brought up both in the past and up to present.

I'm glad there are not as many restrictive rules in place for the design of those big multihulls that are racing around the world and across the oceans for ever new record times.

Well, your post can very easily be read as being a criticism of those in charge of the "arbitrary, man made rules" and others. As an example, take fully-battened mains. You offer only two alternatives for their slower uptake - the rating rules you have already condemned, or a reluctance to adopt "foreign" ideas. The fact that you didn't appear to allow for the fact that the rules could have been managed as they were for good reasons, and the fact that you didn't allow for the fact that the slower adoption of full battens in big moos was for good reasons, indicate that you are being dismissive of the sailors you were referring to.

As Richard notes, there were and are good reasons to stay away from full battens in some types, and in earlier times there were even better reasons. I say that as someone who is about to fit full battens in a jib.

Many (in fact I would say the dramatic majority) of issues with rating rules that most people bring up are fabrications. For example, here we had one designer claim that offshore rating rules banned rotating masts (not always true) and that they used wires to determine rig measurements (untrue, with one exception).

 

[CT249]

Oh, maybe my OP should not have said that the claims of conservatism are complete rubbish. A proportion of rig choices are probably driven by conservatism, and a proportion are perhaps driven by a desire to appear to be different. However, the variety of rigs in small craft seems to indicate to me that sailors per se are not ruled by conservatism when it comes to rig choices.

I can't find many details about the current rigs used by cruisers, however there are quite a few sources that indicate a big switch away from ketches to sloops - a major change of the sort that conservatives would arguably reject.

Secondly - if we use say "people reject innovations because they are conservative" too readily, then we may well be missing another and more valid reason for their actions. Looking at the history of the sport leaves little doubt that allegations of conservatism have been used too often in the past, and surely if we seek to understand the present we should only resort to them when other possibilities have been examined objectively and dispassionately.

 

[motorbike]

Heres my take on it,

Boatbuilders and yachtsmen are for the most part sensible and not prone to throwing away money or performance for no good reason. Over many years the so called "conventional" bermudan rig has risen to the top like the superb cream that it is. There are a few flavours including stayed and unstayed but the principle remains true, they give the best handling and performance for the cost with a few exceptions and specialised local applications. Look at aeroplane wings, which would, if the problem of handling (and ballast) could be solved, be pretty much the end game if performance was the only factor.

Being pretty however is a matter of taste, and certain types of rig have specialised benefits. I am glad we have junk rigs even though they sail poorly compared to bermudan, unstayed rigs are great but only if you dont fly extras or headsails.

The next evolution or revolution is rigs will be materials based, not design. The world of larger stayed boats will not be usurped by junk rigs or unstayed masts anymore than ferro cement will rule the waves. However ferro and junk rigs do go together like horse and carriage, so perhaps their time is yet to come?

 

[brian eiland]

De-ketchification of America

Perhaps you might have a read thru this article by Eric Sponberg.

He makes some interesting points about the ketch rig, and why they may not be so much more in vogue these days

 

[brian eiland]

Sailing Challenge

I recently caught up with an old friend who skippered Olaf Harken's unusual vessel Procyon for its first few years. I showed him a model of my 'single-masted ketch' concept, and then just the other day I sent him a copy of this 'sailing challenge' I had issued to a few naysayers in the past.

You know I can still imagine sailing a big 65-foot catamaran with this mastaft (single-masted ketch) rig right off the mooring, and back to the mooring, without the engine, by myself, with so little effort that I might take it out having only a few spare hours to kill, or for just a carefree daysail.

I wouldn’t have to uncover any sails, nor recover them when I returned to port. I'd likely start out with just unrolling that central 'mainstaysail' then add in more sail area as needed.

I would be less concerned with reefing by myself if the wind were to really come up. If I were short-handed at sea, I would have many of the benefits of a ketch rig, without the necessity of slab reefing the main and mizzen sails of the traditional ketch rig. I'd be in a constant state of helm balance as I could tweak the mizzen sail for that.

That about sums it up. I would like a 65 foot cat that I could take sailing by myself, and that might even be easier than a beach cat. Try hoisting a full batten mainsail on a 65 footer by yourself, or even a 40 footer. Most folks over 50 will have second thoughts, or will just unfurl the jib and forget about hoisting that traditional MAIN sail.

I'm 65 (now 73), and I could sail this 65 foot cat by myself with this aft mast rig. And with the balance and low power afforded by the smaller 'mainstaysail' I could sail this vessel right off the mooring or maybe right off a side-to-dock slip.


Here's a challenge Mr Naysayer..... Le Mans start. I'll be out sailing before you get the covers off your mainsail, and when we return for the day, I'll be at the bar sipping on a Margarita watching you put away your vessel for the day.

Randy sent me a reply this morning...

...reminds me of Procyon,....we would have her sailing before the crew could put away the fenders

 

[mydauphin]

My dad can beat up your dad...

 

[brian eiland]

My dad can beat up your dad...

Was that directed at me?, I don't understand if it was??

 

[CT249]

Brian, the second post's references are still simply instances where a couple of people feel that "alternative" rigs suit them better. That's fine - but it does nothing to prove that other sailors are conservative about rig choice.

Okay, a guy wants to sail a 65 foot cat by himself, so he would like a certain rig. So what? It doesn't prove that people who want to sail other boats in other places and other situations are ruled by conservatism when they choose a different rig. Okay, so someone rates being able to set sail quickly very highly, so he wants an all-furling rig. That's great - but it does not have any bearing on the choices made by other people to whom other factors are more important.

The Sponberg piece says that rig choice has changed. How can something that says that tastes have changed be used to prove that tastes are conservative? Look at the language in the article - it speaks of how "equipment choices have expanded and improved so much....big mainsail is now easily tamed...all this new equipment". So Eric's piece speaks of innovations and changes that have been created and adopted - not of conservatism.