cheap and simple rig

Which part of the pricing is 'completely unbelievable" to you? Mast weight? Materials prices/quantities? Time?

As I said, the $3,700 is the materials for the tube. $1,000 for the fittings and consumables. 100 hours of labour. Let me know how many you want.

Richard,
You did not answer the "what happens downwind in a 30 knot squall" scenario.

As usual when we discuss carbon masts, you choose to not "understand it correctly".

I will say it again. The materials in that mast cost $3,700. Consumables and fittings another $1,000. Plus 100 hours labour. The plans for that mast are included in the boat plans. $500 for other boats.

The heel and deck fittings are UHMWPE (plastic), now 6-8 years old on 4 different boats with no discernable wear. The mast track is carbon and bonded on. The turning blocks are scrap fibreglass and left over resin, bonded on, with $10 sheaves and a stainless pin. These are included in the $1,000.

Paint, wastage (almost zero on the carbon, between 10 and 20% depending on how careful you are on the glass and resin), freight, tax, tools, shed rent, electricity and probably a bunch of other arcane items you will mention (lightning protection, for example) are not included.

CT249,
Not your usual good natured post, mate. Had a bad day?

Rating rules favouring bermudan rigs does not make them the best solution for cruisers, any more than asking for lower cost/easier use than the current status quo solutions is "patronising", which was certainly not Sailor 305's intent.

I cannot think of a single boat built to a rating rule that would qualify as a comfortable cruiser. Nor one that would not be a better cruiser if it was fitted with an unstayed rig.

As well as performing, a cruising rig should be forgiving to sail and easy to use and maintain. Above all it should be safe. ie in an emergency (man overboard, impending grounding or collision, broken gear, approaching squall, time for a rest or a cuppa, etc) it should be possible to stop the boat, regardless of wind strength or direction and solve the problem. This is effortless on an unstayed rig (release the mainsheet), impossible on a stayed rig without dropping the sails.

A sensible stayed rig owner removes and checks his rig at the beginning of the season. He will go up the mast for a look before any major voyage and then check it daily on passage. He is still quite likely to miss the hairline crack that causes the rig to fail. He will replace all his rigging every 5 years or so, spending half a day to tune the rig and another to retune it when the rigging stretches.

An unstayed rig is stepped and forgotten about until it needs a new coat of paint in 15+ years time.

The first rule of sailing is to keep a proper lookout. With a deck sweeping headsail or a boat with raised helm position (most cruising catamarans and heeled monos) and high clew jib, this is impossible without crew on the bow or the lee rail. Having sailed the boat in the video with the ability to see ahead and to leeward without leaving the wheel, it would be nerve wracking to go back to one without this feature.

Bermudan rigs go upwind well, if the sail trimmer is paying attention, which is rarely the case for the cruiser. Broad reaching they are hopeless as the headsail is blanketed. Running, the headsail needs to be poled out, severely limiting the course options and causing the main to chafe against the shrouds. Or a spinnaker hoisted, often involving dropping both the main and jib, then hoisting them again when the wind changes. This can be fun on a sunny day in less than 15 knots, but is less so when the weather turns bad. An unstayed rig, and particularly a ballestron rig needs none of this to perform satisfactorily up, cross and downwind. Pull or ease a single sheet, the rig goes to where it needs to be.

A stayed rig requires foredeck work in a headsail emergency. No problem for a racing crew, a major one for mum and dad cruisers when the autopilot can't cope on a wet and windy night.

Any comments on the 30 knots ddw and lowering the main scenario?

From your post:

Stays may not seem expensive to someone who spends 900 bucks on a pair of spreaders for a 28'ter, but stays, chainplates, bolts, tangs, terminals, turnbuckles and spreaders will certainly cost more on a stayed rig than they will on an unstayed one. And be more likely to fail.

Mainsail life on an unstayed mast will be longer than an unstayed one as it never chafes against stays or spreaders. Mostly though, it does not need to be reefed as often. The flexible mast automatically does this for the first reef. Reefing on a stayed rig is invariably done with the sail flogging while the crew try to drag it down while the boat careens along on a reach. Because it is so fraught, it is usually done before it is necessary. On an unstayed mast, when the strong breeze hits, the sheet is released, the boat stops and the main is reefed without drama. Again, this should be experienced to be appreciated.

Not sure if unstayed rigs need fewer sails, but they certainly have fewer. The 9m/30' Wylie cat (monohull) has one sail, the 15m proa in the video has two. Both perform satisfactorily on all points of sail with the same rig from 5-20+ knots. The same cannot be said about the vast majority of (maybe all?) stayed rig boats.

An unstayed rig vs a stayed one is like gps vs sextant navigation. Removes a lot of the challenges and work, while doing a much better job.

rob

 

I seems a bit odd that you accuse others of having egos and then go on to note that your boat that spent "30 years - at the front of the fleet". It also appears odd that you accuse others of being patronising and rude and then accuse people of ripping off and being ripped off for spending $900 on spreaders. It's rude and patronising to assume that some people cannot work out their own cost/benefits and that the people who sold them stuff ripped them off.

FYI the previous spreaders were second hand, on a base I'd made myself. This time I got a pro in to do the spreaders and wires because the new rig was simpler but some parts were higher-loaded, and installed everything myself and stepped the mast with the family help. For you to sneer at someone for spending a few hundred on a $12,000 boat that was their home for years appears quite odd, to understate it.

It's quite bizarre that you would feel that you can write to sailor "Now - not all 'bermudian rigs' are as low-tech, expensive nor lacking in efficiency - as you may have been lead to believe" and then accuse others of being patronising! That was what I was saying when I mentioned cheap chainplates, second-hand sails, etc.

 

Unstayed rigs are fantastic. The list that Silver Raider objected to so much was meant to show that I own them and appreciate them. However, the bermudan is also great. I appreciate that they are less efficient downwind without a kite, but many like kites even for cruising. Some find the upwind/close reaching pace and flexibility of a headsail to be a great asset for the cruising they do. I sail many craft (stayed and unstayed) without big headies and kites and really notice when we can't just whack up more sail. Pros and cons each way.

I've also know many unstayed masts (albiet in a very different area of sailing) to break from fatigue and the inherent problems of an unstayed mast, and happen to feel that these are issues that do exist. I'm NOT saying that they are worse than stayed rigs but surely which one is better depends on personal preference and situation.

 

Virtually every modern sportboat sails with the same rig from 0 to 20+ knots, same as your claim for the Wyliecat.

The Wyliecat is slower (per PHRF rating) than sloop rigged boats of similar size, dspl, ballast, etc.

I don't know about the proa, but I would imagine the Una rig fits the performance parameters of the multi better than it does the slower moving monos.

 

I am glad we can agree on the fundamental issue.

"it has not happened to me" and a couple of people cruising race boats don't alter any of the reasons why unstayed rigs make better cruising rigs.

What do I mean by better? Less maintenance, automatic depowering, easier and safer to use. More suited to Sailor 305's requirements, and to the vast majority of cruisers I speak to and read about on chat groups.

I disagree that "personal choice" is an option when it comes to keeping a good lookout. Slightly higher coe is a minor issue when an unseen nav mark, anchored boat or ship's bow pokes through the deck sweeping headsail. I don't doubt that when you are offshore, you walk (crawl if it is blowing or rough) up to the bows every 20 minutes to check for shipping etc hidden behind the headsail, and that you have someone permanently up there in crowded waters, but a) not everyone does, and b) it is far more comfortable if you don't need to.

"jib barber hauler, main and traveller, a handful of backstay" are great trimming tools for dinghies and lightly rigged boats day sailing along the coast in daylight, but are not what the average cruiser wants to be playing with in the middle of the night when a squall comes through. Much easier to let the mast bend automatically for the duration of the squall.

There is no reason why light (and heavy) air extras cannot be flown on unstayed rigs. As far as the mast is concerned, a ballestron is a una rig with a substantial extra that is flown up to 20+ knots, upwind and down. Above that, the extra can be reefed, and still flown.

Reefing: I think you would agree that your brother Phil (Catsketcher) is at least as experienced and knowledgable about this as you. This is what he wrote on 02-11-2008.
"Reefing downwind can be done on a pretty normal rig. I can reef my 38ft cats main reasonably easily but it does take about 5 minutes to take in a reef. snip ease a metre of halyard and winch the luff and the reefing pendant down alternately. Then repeat until the reef is taken in. It works fine."

Assume that is 4m of line (2m of luff, 2 of leech) to be winched in. That is 5 minutes of fairly serious winching on a stayed mast rig specifically set up to be easily handled.

Phil may think this is 'reasonably easy', you and Richard may think it is "quick" but it is nowhere near as easy or as quick as doing nothing and letting the flexing mast reduce the sail area for the duration of the gust, then return to full sail as soon as it passes.

Again, you are trying to make your point with observations from "a very different area of sailing". Windsurfer (carbon) and Laser (alloy) masts breaking have about as much to do with cruising rigs suffering from fatigue as fully crewed bermudan race boats looking for a few seconds less time on the race course have to do with typical cruisers. Very little.

I don't know of any unstayed cruising rigs that have had fatigue issues. I would expect it to be the second most common cause of stayed rigs falling down. Number one would be human error/lack of maintenance.

Just thought I would post it again in case anyone had the wrong idea from the rest of your post. ;-)

Paul B
Correct. I should have excluded dinghies (big, small and overgrown).

I get a lot of conflicting information about Wylie cats. Is there a list of PHRF ratings available? Maybe some race results as well? Ideally short handed races as this has more in common with cruising than fully crewed ones.

Lots of little multis have una rigs, but no big ones. Biplane rigs (unstayed masts, one per hull, with headsails) are starting to catch on. We have orders for 6 of them for 12m/40' cats.

rob

 

Yes, there are PHRF lists available. The Wyliecat 30's PHRF (minus kite) is 129-141 as far as I can see, varying by region as usual. The older J/30 is around 138 (with kite), the J/29 (same hull) is around 111.

I think the basic issue is that I don't see many things that are simply good or bad. Fish and chips and a milkshake on the beach are good, so is Moet and fine dining. Chamber music is fantastic, so is pogoing to the early Mekons. Driving a '71 VW Kombi camper is fun, so is driving a sports Honda. A Tornado is a fantastic boat, so is a Laser Radial. Unstayed rigs are great (which is why I own some) and stayed rigs are great in different ways.

I was not saying that unstayed rigs are inferior, I was saying that other rigs also have good points.

 

Rob,

When I replied about the Wyliecat performance I missed the opportunity to comment on some of these other points. I understand why you don't like stayed sloop rigs, they don't fit with the type of boat you are trying to peddle. But you can make your point by saying thngs that are misleading:

I can. So can a lot of people who are out cruising the world in boats derived from rating rule shapes. You could start by talking to anyone who owns a Swan built before the 1990s.

Why would it not be possible to release the sheets on a stayed boat? In fact it is common to heave to in a stayed sloop rig, something that would not be quite so easy in an unstayed catboat.

Here in SoCal you could walk the marinas and note that a vast majority of the boats have not had their rigs removed every year and I doubt you would find more than a handful who replace the rigging every twenty years, let alone five.

We are blessed with warm weather, boats in the water all year, low humidity, temperature almost never reaches freezing, etc.

Somehow the number of gravity storms we see approaches zero (in a statistical way of looking at it).

I don't understand why you think a high clew on the jib makes it difficult to see to leeward. I have been under the impression that most cruisers like a high clew to enhance visibility.

I have been sailing for more than half my life. I've never been nerve wracked about what is to leeward. Even in hotly contested racing situations it is pretty simple to have awareness of what is to leeward. Generally a quick peek under the boom every so often suffices.

Having a well placed window in a sail is also a decent solution. I have windows in all my sails (including the assymetric spinnaker). I can always see to leeward from the weather side, beating and reaching.

Why do you think the sails need constant trimming?

This is not true. On a broad reach with the boat moving well the apparent wind direction is pulled forward and the sails are anything but blanketing.

Why would your course be limited?

I have been going by the assumption that you know how to sail. This comment makes me wonder. No one in their right mind would be dropping the main when they hoist a spinnaker.

Maybe you have never heard of a blooper? It is a sail that was invented to help balance the old IOR boats when the size of the spinnakers was so much larger than the size of the mains. This unbalanced the boats and made them hard to sail DDW in a big breeze.

Dropping the main would make this known problem even greater. I do have some experience with this just a couple of years ago. Just before the last upwind mark we blew out the clew of our new carbon main (sailmaker issue). We rounded the mark under headsail only. As we were winning the series up to that point we decided to hoist the spinnaker to try to hold onto a good placing at the downwind finish of that, the final race.

Big mistake. Without a mainsail to balance agaist the kite, a big breeze on, and a big swell running it was a nightmare trying to keep the boat under the sail.

No cruiser should ever do something like that.

I don't think you have ever seen anyone who knows what they are doing while using a modern reefing system.

 

Rob,

Your posts clearly indicate someone who has no idea what you are talking about. In thousands of races, and tens if not hundreds of thousands of sea miles I have never once seen, or even hear anyone suggest dropping a main to raise a spinnaker. If you do it this way, no wonder you are so screwed up.

Reefing on a Bermuda rigged boat, even downwind takes all of about 30 seconds assuming proper hardware. On an Andrews 70' with a 115 foot mast, three of us could reef the main in about 2 minutes, including tieing off the bunched main, even less time was needed to haul it back up.

And a $5,000 carbon 50' mast is so far below the current cost of one, if you can approach these numbers you are in the wrong business. I'm not kidding when I say if you can make them at this price, certified by an engineer for the loads, I will take as many as you can make. That would put the price point below the cost of an aluminium rig the same size, and likely below the cost of a steel mast.

Replacing the standing rigging every five years is directly contradicted by every rigging manufacturer in the world. Depending on type they recommend inspection at 8 years, replacement when needed.



Making untrue assertions on some forums may work ok, but not here. The average poster on Boatdesign.net has years of sailing experience, many are designers, and at least one actually designed the unstayed rig you are so fond of. Trying to explain to the guy who originally designed a rig, why it is so advetagious, then disagreeing with him, doesn't undermine him, it just shows you to be lacking actual facts, as opposed to poorly formented opinions based on nothing.

 

Guys stop convincing him otherwise. I have a used flagpole for sale.

 

Daup - How much is it in $'s ??? How big - dia top, middle, bottom ??? How long is it ??? & can I get it shipped to Philipp's ??? Any idea how much the freight & Ins would cost ??? I've got a project starting in 4 to 6 weeks - that'll only take about 9 to 11 weeks to complete. kWe could sure use something like a light weight hollow flagpole. Thanks. Ciao, james

 

phrf high average and low WYLIECAT 44 -12 -12 -12

 

I believe that boat scrapped the Wylie Freestanding Una Rig and was converted to a stayed fractional sloop rig by Schooner Creek with the rig design by Tim Kernan.

Was there more than one built?

 

I don't know how many were built or raced or how the rating was arrived at, but I remember thinking when I first looked at the specs that it was one big sail to handle even with the wishbone. I can see why it might have been converted to a fractional stayed rig, but by all accounts (? internet) it seems to have performed well with the unstayed rig.

 

Chris,

What many cruisers worry about is not how often a problem may occur, but whether it might. This applies to collisions with unnoticed objects, reefing downwind, sudden squalls, masts falling down, capsize, sinking and many other situations. They dread problems which could kill them or their crew, cost money and/or need them to wait for spares in expensive ports.
On the other hand, gung ho ex racers with 50,000 miles offshore in other people's boats tend to look forward to problems, because they add to the excitement (particularly if they are only along as rail meat).
Sailor305 is very much the former.

You introduced the bermudan as a "high cost, high tension option" with your race boat comments. As you get away from race boat rigs and crews, the performance advantages diminish, see Richard's comments further down.

It is not whether the maintenance option is a "biggie" or not. Just whether no maintenance is better than some and what are the results of neglecting to do it. If you want "evidence" join a cruisers forum and ask the long term cruisers how much time/money they spend maintaining their rig, and what happens if they don't. And compare that with a rig with nothing to maintain.

We have had no trouble with plain plastic bearings up to the 15m boats over the last 8 years. $200 each for the fancy ones, the "budget" ones are free.

Unstayed masts do not have tight forestays. A problem racing upwind in big breeze (fixed by taking down the jib), but not a problem for cruisers. Light air loose luffed extras do add more complexity and remove some advantages. Fortunately, they are not needed in the situations where the advantages are needed. Strong wind, raising, lowering, reefing, maintenance, automatic depowering, etc.

No need for you to time your reefing. Phil already did. But if you do, please video it as well and post it.

Swept spreader, short overlap rigs on race boats are great. For cruising, they are better than big headsail rigs, but not as easy as unstayed rigs for the reasons I gave, plus they are not so good when sailing square as you cannot ease the main enough. Gybing accidentally and taking out a crew member or the rig is another one of those things cruisers worry about. These rigs either have backstays (which mean less efficient pin head mains) or very highly loaded shrouds. Inner forestays (or prebend and it's associated loads) are required when deep reefed, which makes self tacking headsails impossible.

Actually pretty easy if you have enough blocks or winches. Then after the gust, you do it all in reverse. Fun around the cans, pretty tedious on a long trip, so most leave it depowered and go back to reading their book. The unstayed rig drops power in the puffs, picks it back up in the lulls with no strings pulled. Which is easier?

In enough wind to capsize the boat in the video the top of the rig falls away from the wind by almost 2.5m/8'. This effectively removes all the drive from the top of the rig, reducing sail area and lowering the coe. Not far off an order of magnitude more than a stayed 7/8ths rig. Check the mast movement in the video in 15 knots of breeze. Far more than any stayed rig. There are also some photos at http://harryproa.com/Elementarry/SailingPhotos_4.htm which show a smaller mast bending when powered up. "Well tuned" is also relevant. Not all unstayed (or stayed) masts qualify.

The only failures I know of were due to poor manufacturing which these days would be picked up by simple QC before they left the factory.

Goodo.

Thanks for the PHRF numbers. Would seem Wylie cats without spinnakers are in the same ball park as the similar(?) age and length J30 with a spinnaker. Did you dig up any shorthanded race results?

Your "personal preference" and "neither good nor bad" comments are pretty obvious and no one is disputing them.

Paul B,
Thanks for the plug, although I prefer sell to "peddle". I have no problem with stayed masts. Have raced and cruised them for years. For long term, low cost cruising on a budget (what this thread is about), my experience indicates stayed masts are superior for all the reasons I have given. Which is why my cruising designs use them.

As I said, people cruising in race boats does not mean they are comfortable. I was hired hand on a Two Tonner in Spain for a while in the 80's. The boat next door was a Swan. Beautiful boat. Pre race, they took half a day to get all the comfortable stuff off it to get it in "rating rule" trim. Downwind in a breeze it was hard work (as were most rating boats back then) and was a handful for the large crew. Upwind it needed a lot of sail, heeled a lot and was quite wet. Hardly comfortable.

I said "on any point of sail". Release the sheets on a stayed rig running square, or anything broader than a reach, the boat will keep sailing until you luff. Then it will stop, headsail or spinnaker flogging. Sort out the mess and drop the sails or winch the headsail to the windward side and tie the rudder to leeward to heave to.
Is this preferable to releasing a single sheet, the rig weathercocking and the boat coming to a stop?

You can see "old rigging" in any marina. The question is, would you cross oceans with it? And if so, would you check it first? Most cruisers do, for obvious reasons. You might also want to check your insurance policy before you claim for a broken mast with old rigging.
This compares with having nothing to worry about on the unstayed rig.

High clews and high helms was my point. Sorry if this was not clear. My reference to low clews was in reply to Chris' comments about racing rigs.

A quick peek under the boom every so often increases your arc of vision from ~200 degrees to maybe 300 and leaves the most likely area of problems unchecked. This is not a proper lookout. Windows are great, in daylight. Until they craze, get wet, crack or disappear in a reef. Which is why they are rare on cruisers.

Why do "sails need constant trimming"? Because the wind is rarely constant in force or direction. Again, this was a reference to racing bermudan rigs. An unstayed rig is much more forgiving. To quote Richard Woods (who dislikes them) on unstayed ballestron rigs: "the advantages are: Easy sailing: The sails are always working correctly, whatever point of sail. Maybe it would be better to say the rig works to 95% efficiency all the time. A conventional rig may work to 100% if you're an expert, but only 70% if you're not."
Lots of cruisers are expert trimmers, but they get bored after the first hour or so and the rig is left alone at 70%.

Why would the "course be limited" running square with poled out jib? Because the jib is poled out to windward and the main is hard against the shrouds. Luff and the jib goes aback, bear away and the boat gybes.

I was bowman on a couple of Sydney Hobarts with bloopers back when I was the gung ho type described above. Huge fun but I would not cruise with one. But there are many multi sailors (which is what the original poster is, or wants to be) who cruise downwind under spinnaker alone. Why? To stop the main blanketing the chute, prevent accidental gybes and so their expensive mainsail does not chafe against the swept back stays and diamonds. It is also pretty common in the Solo Transpac to sail with twin headsails poled out each side to help keep the boats (smallish monos, usually) pointing downwind and avoiding spinnaker problems in after dark squalls. Not sure if they keep the mains up or not, (suspect not) but the rig would work better if they did.

You are right, I have never seen a reef taken in that was not hard work. Next time you are sailing in 30 knots, or even 20, please take in a reef, video it and post it so I can see how it is done. I can promise you that it will be more work than watching the top of an unstayed rig bend.

Stumble,
see above for mainless spinnaker sailing.

Three of you reefing in 2 minutes is 6 man minutes. This is near enough 6 minutes longer than it takes to depower an unstayed rig when the breeze gets up. No winching required, and it will be back to full sail again as soon as the breeze drops.

I have said it three times, but quite happy to say it again. The $4,700 is for the materials for the 120 kg/264 lbs unstayed tube in the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8chR6DAFjGA. There is another 100 hours of labour to add to this for the amateur builder.

However, you are correct. It is much cheaper than other masts, which is why our mast builder is booked out until early next year, no mean feat in this economy.

Tubes for stayed masts are up to 50% lighter, with maybe 80% of the labour, so cheaper than the one above. Stop telling me you aren't kidding about buying some and let me know how many you want.

Not sure what you mean by "engineer certified", but http://www.etamax.com.au/ engineer ours and the masts pass the static bend tests to within a couple of millimetres and are within a percent of the designed weight. An example of the work we do is attached. These are infused in one piece for the Canadian Toro 34 catamaran. They got quotes from all the mast manufacturers, were forced to spec alloy as carbon was so expensive, then discovered us and despite the high exchange rates and shipping half way round the world, could afford to go with the all carbon option.

It may be "8 years all over the world, inspect after 5" wherever you live. Here it is 5 years for serious cruisers, inspect every year. In the UK it is 10 and inspect every year. Regardless, all are longer than the recommended replacement time for the standing rigging on unstayed rigs.

No idea what your last paragraph is about, but "Lacking actual facts, poorly formented opinions based on nothing" is not quite correct.
I have personally built a dozen or so carbon unstayed masts, been involved with the build of many more, engineered them for my personal use and had others engineered by half a dozen different engineers. There are about 20 of my designs with unstayed rigs sailing world wide, at least as many more under construction and a bunch of masts for other boats being built to my plans.

The only other mast designer here is Eric Sponberg. We go back a long way and have huge respect for each other. No undermining there.

Anonymous posters calling me names and making derogatory personal comments says a lot more about them than it does me.

rob

 

ill agree with what Rob Denney has stated about mast material cost. The price of carbon, especially UNI directional carbon which makes up approx 60-75% of the total fibre weight, is quite affordable these days provided you arnt getting ripped off by your supplier.

When combined with a innovative and well thought out build method to reduce the skilled labour component, you have your mast at great value. Go and talk to your suppliers re. carbon UNI, you will be pleasantly surprised at the price - unlike the woven cloths which are still quite expensive.