Mast loads for freestanding masts

The OP is talking about a cat (first post, last line) and you have dozens of posts about building, sailing and improving Kankama, 'your' Chamberlain cat, so please tell us how you reef, solo, at night in a squall on your cat.

Because the apparent wind is stronger when you are reaching/going upwind than it is when you are running square. At a certain wind strength, luffing is deemed dangerous by pretty much every multihull sailor and designer. It's also uncomfortable and likely to be wet.

 

The OP chose to insult all stayed masts, and I was responding to that global insult rather than just to Bahamas cruising.

Kankama's not mine, but she can be reefed downwind as the owner has described on the internet. Same technique as given earlier.

Yes, an unstayed rig with the boom squared out can take a wider range of apparent wind angles before gybing, but it's not necessarily dramatically wider and therefore not dramatically different in practice. And a boat with a stayed rig normally has the mainsheet in tight enough to stop the boom slamming into the rigging in a gybe. Certainly I'd never go downwind in strong winds with the sheet so slack that the boom can hit the shrouds.

On our current mono I think we've had one unplanned heavy-air gybe in eight years of sailing. That was as a result of a windshift at night so big that having the boom forward a few degrees extra wouldn't have stopped the gybe. There was no damage.

I don't go sailing around at night close to the edge of gybing without a preventer on unless I'm concentrating for a short time or the wind is very light, and the latter is very rare. Why would I? Why run that deep?

Solo at night I reef my main when going downwind just as I have written earlier, and quite like the guys in the video do it.

I don't know what would fail on KK's mast. The Cole 43 I did Hobarts on lost a shroud and finished after jury rigging it. My old half tonner had a lee shroud come off the spreader tip and the stick stayed up . I've read several reports of boats losing forestays and keeping the rig up on the jib and its halyard, and of boats losing shrouds and keeping their rig up. Any claim that loss of a single component in a stayed rig must result in the loss of a rig is simply untrue.

I've had yachts with stayed masts since 1983 and never had one of their sticks drop or snap.

 

Where is this "described on the internet", please?

You mean you hoist the spinnaker, set the autopilot to drive all over the ocean to reduce the apparent wind and keep it full, then grind down the mainsail which is plastered against the shrouds? The video was not a serious squall, nor was it at night, solo or cruising.

Fair enough, but the issue is not the wording, it's the comparison. Losing stays on fully crewed race boats, jury rigging, having lee shrouds fail (would the mast have stayed up if you tacked, assuming night time, strong wind and big waves?) and spending time and money on maintenance and replacement is a bit different to having nothing to fail in the first place.

Not just different in reality, but also in mindset. Unstayed rigs are less mentally stressful than stayed ones.

Certain proof that it can never happen. ;-). Could you detail the maintenance and replacement schedule of the rigging on these boats and we can compare it with that on an unstayed rig.

You forgot to list the 'benefits of stayed rigs' you referred to in your earlier post or a similar list of benefits for an unstayed rig, for the OP's (or any) cruising cat.

 

1- Rob, just google Kankama and reefing. It can be reefed square running in up to 35 knots even without the nice expensive batten cars on my boat. And yes, I do know the sailor and the boat very well and it is not BS.

2- I did NOT say I drop my main exactly like the guys in the video so don't pretend I did. I drop it in "quite" a similar manner which means I just release the halyard, winch in the tack reef and then winch in the leach reef. It really is not difficult.

As I have already pointed out, some extremely experienced sailors prefer to reef downwind. Here's some other people who use or prefer the technique;

Downwind Reefing https://sailwildling.com/2015/10/13/downwind-reefing/

https://www.sailmagazine.com/cruising/reefing-downwind

The Blue View - Reefing — Just a Little Further https://justalittlefurther.com/just-a-little-further/the-blue-view/the-blue-view-reefing

Reefing/dousing the mainsail downwind https://forum.oceancruisingclub.org/PrintTopic2157.aspx

John Kretschmer Reefs Downwind https://www.morganscloud.com/jhhtips/john-kretschmer-reefs-downwind/

Really, it's not the problem some people seem to think it is. And the very experienced John Kretschmer goes so far as to say that it is the more seamanlike method. I'm not sure I agree with him but my setup is very quick to reef so it may be different to his.


3- I did tack with that lee shroud off the top spreader - I didn't notice it till then. The mast stayed up as I bore away to run back into harbour.

4- The maintenance and replacement schedule on the 20 footer included;

a- replacing the forestay after being hit by a Northshore 38. That was it.
b- The maintenance and replacement schedule on the 28 footer was done while experimenting with the rig, which was part of the interest of the project. It was a used Etchells mast replacing a masthead rig so I started with a minimalist single-spreader setup, went to doubles, then swept the spreaders and went to short overlap. At some times I cut corners, for example doing my own thimble swages, doing my own mast mods, replacing my own chainplates, mast girder and compression strut, and apart from the starboard spreader tip securing wire nothing gave way. It was not rocket science.
c- The maintenance and replacement schedule of the standing rigging of the 36 footer in about seven years includes replacing one line on the backstay adjuster - nothing else. We will be up for new rigging in a couple of seasons and as adults with great experience in stayed and unstayed rigs we have been able to make our own decision to incur that minimal cost and don't need any patronising advice about how it is excessive or unnecessary. It is one hell of a lot cheaper than buying a new boat or fitting an unstayed mast.

In all the above I have utilised one of the advantages of the stayed rig, which is that you can tune the rig by adjusting static stay tensions and playing the backstay.

4- Bearings and structures on unstayed masts can and do fail. So can unstayed masts on cruising boats. Anyone who pretends any sort of rig was completely maintenance free is just silly.

5- I did not try to list the benefits for the OP's cruising cat since I didn't want to get into that specific subject. I came into the thread to address the OP's incorrect and insulting claims about stayed rigs in general, not in his specific situation since that would divert into questions about why he wants such a small sail area and why he thinks soft wings would work well.

I do know a bunch of designers who are far more experienced than you and, from our interactions, far more reasonable than you who prefer stayed rigs on cruising cats so unless you are extremely arrogant I think you will agree there are positives and negatives in both designs that suit different situations. The AC, Moth, Ultime and other designers are not stupid, for example, and their use of stays provides an example of some (only some) of the advantages of stays, many of which also relate to other boats.

I like unstayed rigs, which is why I own half a dozen boats with them and have vast experience with them (quite likely more hours than you have) but they have advantages and disadvantages and the OP's global insults to many thousands of people who are far more knowledgeable, smarter and more experienced that he is were just stupid - especially when he is so ignorant he doesn't even know of the world's most popular unstayed rig.

 

Have you tried it on a boat without any winches fitted? I "may" have been able to get the sail down had winches been fitted, but many small boats do not.

As for "bearings" etc on unstayed masts, my last unstayed rig was a square mast foot going into a slightly larger square hole.

Complicating simplicity is a step backwards. Oh and rigging is a pile of different metals, it is not a thing capable of being insulted.

 

No, I haven't reefed on a windy square run without winches, but that doesn't mean that the OP is correct in his global abuse of stayed rigs as a whole. There have been unstayed rigs that couldn't be handled without winches and stayed rigs that can. The presence of stays is not a relevant factor.

Yes, bearings in small boats can be simple (as is the case with the six unstayed mast boats my wife and I own) but in the bigger offshore boats one is dealing with structures under significant load that must be either sophisticated or heavy.

The Oxford dictionary doesn't say anything that says or implies objects cannot be insulted. Other definitions, such as the Britannia one, defines "insult" as "to do or say something that is offensive to (someone) ......". Denigrating an object someone owns can clearly be offensive and therefore suits the accepted definition.

Finally, if complicating simplicity is a step backwards then the ideal boat would be a plank of wood with no complications like motive power, water storage or an anchor. I think we can agree that such an object would be inferior as a cruising boat to something with a rig, rudder, cabin and water tanks so clearly adding complications is NOT a step backwards.

I'm fairly sure that your craft has a deck, a rudder, a simple unstayed mast step, hull sides, a halyard, mainsheet and other complications that windsurfers don't have - but that does not mean that your more complicated craft is a step backwards from a windsurfer.

 

Any psychaiatrist in the forum can confirm it?

 

Kinda chalk n cheese comparison. I mean, you "could" cross the Atlantic on a windsurfer, but i would rather complicate it with hull sides etc. I did suffer a forestay failure before making it half way across the Atlantic, so i am aware of the mental concern of every swage, every turn buckle, every clevis pin etc etc. The unstayed mast is either fails, or it does not, but it is "one" item, rather than many small links in a chain that could be catastrophic. Not to say they have not also had failures.

You are free to feel offended on behalf of your rig, if you so choose, because some ones opinion differs from yours. But if you consider a fully stayed rig so superior, why even be offended?

I went for single unstayed mast for simplicity and cost. If money was no object, i would have replicated the rig that actually failed on me, all inboard bermudian cutter, but the cost would have been 100x more, and i wanted to go sailing, not work another 18 months.

 

Please read my posts rather than misquoting them. I am NOT offended because someone has different opinions. I have NEVER claimed that at all. What I am annoyed about is that someone with almost no experience insulted a bunch of extremely popular rigs (stayed ketch, stayed schooner, Ultime rotating carbon wingmast, Moth rig, gaff cutter, yada yada yada) and inter alia many of the people who own them and the professionals who build them for extremely good reasons.

Personally I don't like those who repeatedly throw invalid insults at large numbers of their fellow humans, without any logical basis. You may be happy with large-scale insults of your fellow humans, some of us are not. Some of us prefer to respect others and learn from them. I know plenty of very smart and experienced people who cruise on a huge variety of boats including many I wouldn't like - why not learn from them instead of assuming, as the OP does, that most of them are fools who use a stupid rig?

You've owned a bunch of boats that aren't ocean crossers but are far more complicated than a plank or a windsurfer, so it's apparent that you would rather complicate your craft and don't actually follow the principle that complicating simplicity is a step backwards. Simplicity isn't a goal if it causes too much harm elsewhere. My taste is definitely towards simplicity but not when it interferes too much with the functionality that I want.

If an unstayed mast suited you that's great. They suit many of my boats, too, which is why I own a bunch of them. That does not mean that the very large number of extremely experienced and intelligent people who choose other rigs for very good reasons should be denigrated.

 

If one thing fails on an unstayed mast, it being only one, you demast. If one thing fails on a stayed mast you may completely demast or probably not. Also, demasting with a stayed mast leaves enough hardware left to jury rig the boat.

 

You really should not complain about people "misquoting you", and then go take a flying leap in a characterisation of what you think is reality.
I worked on one of the first mega-yachts to be fitted with an aero-rig. Im aware of the failure issues with bearings both at the foot of the mast and deck structure, the replacement was "less complicated", and worked fine for the next 20,000 miles, but the entire system was re-worked after.

Ive owned a bunch of boats, half of which where "ocean crossing capable", and three of them did so, single handed, as is my want.
I have not called anyone a fool for using any type of rig or labelled anything "stupid". I took every opportunity to sail other boats with different rigs, this is how i concluded an all inboard cutter rig was best for my use. See Vancouver 27. I do not require your handicap statistics to tell me how slow it is.
The OP is not discussing a boat that would benefit from a rig that would require bearings, that is coming from a practical engineering standpoint, and common sense, for his simple craft. It is also just an opinion.

 

One would hope. That kind of blanket statement is not always true though. Look how many rigs are cut away entirely to avoid hull damage. My last boat carried two extending poles and ready made dyneema shrouds. If the mast and rigging went over, i had a short A frame system that could fly 2 jibs..... assuming the poles did not get ripped from the deck mounts in a dismasting situation.

 

What I do have is a lifetime of practical experience building and fixing things which allows me to be able analyze the strengths and weaknesses of a system. "Professionals" do all kinds of things out of "tradition" that are ill advised. For instance, the way AC units are mounted on flat rooftops using wooden boards or sometimes on poorly designed metal contraptions, and most often they are impeding water flow causing pooling, rot, corrosion and prevent proper and easy maintenance because there is no room to work under them. The result, extremely costly leaks and ultimately roof replacement due to compromised roof structures. Yet this is standard practice by "professionals". The point is that because something is standard practice doesn't mean it is the right way to do something. Stayed rigs require complicated engineering and construction and consistent attention and maintenance in order to be safe, that much is plainly apparent to me. I am actually impressed by the engineering of stayed rigs.

I did not throw *repeated* insults nor did I insult any person directly. I apologized above for my statement, for if people felt personally insulted, as that was not my intention. The criticism of stayed masts does have a valid and logical basis, as I have put forward, and has been elucidated by many proponents of freestanding rigs. Yes, they may be biased, but that does not make their criticism unfounded. I came into this without any preconceived notions, and have come to the conclusion that for my safety, ease of operation, and other practical considerations an unstayed mast is the right choice, for my use case. Also, due to my limited engineering ability(mainly due to my limited mathematical abilities), an unstayed rig built and engineered by myself has much less chance for failure.

I don't think they are fools. They obviously are not if they can make a complicated system like that function relatively reliably. I simply believe that the way the evolution of sailings vessels has panned out that there may be some tunnel vision going on.

I have learned from them, that is exactly how I came to my conclusions.

Again, I'm sure there are practical reasons for having a stayed rig on many vessels, but my personal view is that there are significant safety implications for a cruising boat.

 

Yes, the mast would be encapsulated by the sail, so a rotating mast would have no benefit.

 

Originally i intended to use a version of a cambered junk rig because of the advantages in safety and convenience, then I realized that a soft wing not only would have better performance but could be even further simplified over the junk rig in terms of the number of lines that need to be adjusted. I expect it will have better performance than both a conventional rig and the junk rig close to the wind(Important for the Bahamas, especially for what I plan to do), and better performance downwind than a conventional rig since it can be sheeted 90 degrees, or even beyond so can act as a foil at greater angles downwind. At other angles or in light wind I expect somewhat reduced performance over a conventional rig. The biplane configuration will be a hindrance at a narrow range of angles.