Rodger,
You didn't ask a question. You made a statement. Unless your question was
"Why should I not be considered stupid because I knowingly violated code
without understanding the engineering behind the code?" If that, in fact is
your intention, I'll leave my opinion unstated. If you would ask what the
risks are, I would tell you.
Steve

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
I looked big, clumsy, sixty dollar spreader lights and figured there must
be a better option for something I won't use much. I see it primarily as a
way to light up our sails when we really want to be visible. Expected usage
would put the price at about a buck a minute over the next five years.

I found a nice, compact, fog light for less than twelve dollars a pair.
These things used to last for years in the salt and blast under the front
of my car so it seems like they ought to work on a spreader. It's about
the size of an egg and the same amps as the big chrome thing that came off
because it's straps were dozy from being pushed on by the sail. Yeah, the
bracket is painted steel but I already have a spare.

I got it all installed with the mast ready to go up tomorrow and then
realized that, even though it is two wire, one is grounded to the case and
thus the mast. As long as I get the polarity right, I don't see a downside
to this. The stays are tied to the bonding system. In fact, there is an
upside in that breakage of the negative wire won't disable my mast lights.
Their black wires are all tied together somewhere in the mast.

If this were something that was on a lot, like the running lights, I'd
isolate it just to keep it in conformity with standard practice. Do any of
the electrical contributors see any reason to do so for something like
this that is used infrequently?

BTW I did drill a drain hole through the lens to let the water out since
it will be in a position it was not designed for.

--

Roger Long