Thom Stewart wrote:

Pete;

There was a guy named; "Blondie Hassler" who put a Junk Sail on a deep
keel cut away hull. 26 feet long. He designed a wind powered self
steering system and sailed her around and around the world by himself.
The boat was named "Jester"

To this day, one of the toughest upwind, single handed races across the
Atlantic Ocean still carries a Class for small craft vessels named the
"JESTER CLASS" So much for Junk Sails not being able to go up wind. A
Folk Boat with a Single Junk Sail was the first winner and the class
carries the name.

Actually Thom, Jester never won the race.

And while the owner after Hassler sailed that boat a heck of a lot, a
dozen or more Trans-Atlantics IIRC, he also gave up a number of voyages
because they turned into protracted sessions trying to beat to weather.


Thought you might want to remind Doug that a Junk sail on a upwind
designed hull will go very well upwind and do it easily on the skipper.


I think you should take a closer look at your own evidence, there Thom.
Is a Folkboat an especially efficient upwind hull? Was Jester reckoned a
fast boat or weatherly by any objective standard?

DSK

Jester would take about 50 days to cross this Atlantic.
Hardly fast.

"DSK" wrote
Thom Stewart wrote:

Pete;

There was a guy named; "Blondie Hassler" who put a Junk Sail on a deep
keel cut away hull. 26 feet long. He designed a wind powered self
steering system and sailed her around and around the world by himself.
The boat was named "Jester"

To this day, one of the toughest upwind, single handed races across the
Atlantic Ocean still carries a Class for small craft vessels named the
"JESTER CLASS" So much for Junk Sails not being able to go up wind. A
Folk Boat with a Single Junk Sail was the first winner and the class
carries the name.

Actually Thom, Jester never won the race.

And while the owner after Hassler sailed that boat a heck of a lot, a
dozen or more Trans-Atlantics IIRC, he also gave up a number of voyages
because they turned into protracted sessions trying to beat to weather.


Thought you might want to remind Doug that a Junk sail on a upwind
designed hull will go very well upwind and do it easily on the skipper.


I think you should take a closer look at your own evidence, there Thom.
Is a Folkboat an especially efficient upwind hull? Was Jester reckoned a
fast boat or weatherly by any objective standard?

DSK

But why is this bad? Taken to a logical conclusion, you're saying the
less weight aloft the better.

From a standpoint of stability & speed, that's true. But I agree with
you that there are other factors.


Peter Wiley wrote:
Yeah. Like, taken to its ultimate, you have no rig at all and end up
with..... a tug boat!


Yep.

OTOH, with no expenditure of money or maintenance time on sails &
rigging, the engine can get more attention and thus be prefectly reliable.





Depends on what you want the boat to do. Roll damping is good, but
weight aloft also hurts LPOS.


Don't I recall some data from the Fastnet fiasco of some years ago WRT
lack of weight aloft as a contrib factor to rolling over?


Don't recall that issue, but a number of the boats had wooden keel shoes
& lead ballast pigs in the bilge in order to raise the CG (thus handily
reducing stability) to gain a more favorable rating.

... But I'm
uncomfortable with a boat, no matter how "cruisy," that does not go to
windward pretty well,


So - what do you mean by 'pretty well'? You're an engineer - give some
figures.


How about a requirement that the boat make a reasonable & reliable VMG,
with good steerageway & reliable in stays, in the roughest 10% of wind &
water conditions near the coasts where she is to be sailed? Assume that
anything rougher, like say a Gulf hurricane, will be avoided.



or (as many cruising boats) will only make ground
to weather at all in ideal conditions. Too easy to get trapped, and too
dependent on the engine (odd as it may sound for a tug boat owner to say
that).


Yeah. But what makes you think this criticism applies ot all or even
most junk rigs? I think you've taken assumptions and treated them as
facts.

To some extent, sure. My experience with junk rigs has been limited to
sailing in company with some & watching them closely, since I'm
interested in them. If it sounds like I'm being dismissive, I'm not...
it's just the junk rig has gotten a huge build-up from so many... often
with less experience than I have myself... and I have not seen much
justification in real-world performance.

For example, it's claimed (and to a large extent I agree) that the junk
rig is easy to handle. But most junk rigs are also small for the boats
they're on... sometimes pitifully small. Well, if it's truly easier to
handle then why don't junk rigs carry *more* sail area, rather than
less? Why do we not see large, easily handled junk rigs on racing boats?



... There are at least 2 examples - the Colvin Gazelle design and
the Benford dory - that can & do go to windward in somewhat less than
ideal conditions. The first Gazelle was built and sailed for some years
sans engine. The Hill's dory ditto.


The Hills are a better example IMHO. Both are also examples of fitting
one's sailing style to the characteristics of the boat. I've got nothing
against that!


What's worse, many boats that have difficulty getting to windward are
ulso unhandy on the helm & reluctant in stays. It's a vicious circle.


OK, true. But do you think either of these things are peculiar to or
universal amongst junk rigs?

I don't think so, but I do think that they are fairly common among junk
rigged boats... mainly because I've observed so many times in real world
performance of junk rigged boats.

... If so, why? At least 2 people with junk
rigs disagree with you.

Uh huh. And of course, those people are totally & completely unbiased,
and I'm sure they also have many years of experience (and success) with
modern high performance marconi rigs


... Where is the basis for your implication that
junk rig vessels are

a) difficult or impossible to sail to windward

Observation, both mine & what is implied by the way junk enthusiasts
describe their boats; and the way that even the best junk rig sailors
sail their boats.

b) unhandy on the helm and
c) reluctant in stays.


That's more a hull design & overall design issue. Long keels and small
unbalanced rudders don't shine in handling.

IIRC Badger had a long fin and a partially balanced rudder.




It might be a vicious circle, but you haven't demonstrated that it is a
universal characteristic of junk rigs

I haven't claimed that it is. Only saying what I think, and what I've
observed.



Doug, almost *any* rig can be picked up 2nd hand or free, if you don't
mind spending time hunting around. I really can't see this is relevant.


Well, it is *very* relevant if the greatest reason for choosing a junk
rig is that it can be put together cheaply.



I think the people who extol the junk rig are very full of descriptives
like "no rig easier to control" when that's not really quantifiable...
and the rig they are extolling is also "easier to control" because
there's less of it.


So? Still a valid point, if you agree that the objective of a rig is to
get you from A to B in a reasonable time. 'Reasonable' is subject to
definition but I really don't think 140 mile days for a cruising boat
is bad.


It's not all that great for a 40+ foot LWL boat. But I agree it's not
shabby, and it does get you there.



I also wonder how many of them have much experience
with modern rigs... the same crowd seems very down on roller furling &
self tailing winches.

Another point is that "easy to control" and "inexpensive" are the junk
rigs *only* two virtues.


How about long lived, difficult to damage and easy to repair?


I would suggest that given similar usage, the junk rig would be no more
longer lived than a full batten marconi, and probably more prone to
damage unless it were made of comparably hi-tech modern materials. "Easy
to repair" is difficult to quantify IMHO, sewing sails is a PITA and
other repairs may be more difficult on one or the other, depending on
what specific part you're talking about.

But for a point of reference, a large number of marconi rogged sloops
with solid vangs, full battens, lazy jacks, and roller furlers, have
circumnavigated with no significant rig failure.



On what point(s) of sailing? Upwind, maybe - if you care. IIRC Colvin
said the rig points as high as a Marconi rig but made more leeway.

That may have been true, given less effective underwater foils, back in
the 1960s.


I think we're back to the draft factor again. You're cherry picking. If
you put a highly efficient to windward rig on a shoal draft cruising
vessel, it ain't going to work too well. Keep the engineering params in
mind - it's a cruising vessel with shoal draft for gunkholing.

Sure, but if all else is equal, the marconi is still going to be better
at windward sailing.

This one of the basic trade-offs in picking the basic characteristics of
the boat... only after you've settled what you want in the way of LOA,
draft, tonnage, etc etc, should you then consider what is an appropriate
rig.

And in a way, the fact that you don't seem to consider the junk to be an
appropriate rig for a modern light displacement fin keeled racer-cruiser
shows that we are pretty much in agreement on this rig's basic
characateristics

Demonstrate, within these constraints, your assertion that the Marconi
rig will outpoint the junk rig.

For one thing, the battens are all wrong. Have you read what Bolger says
about the difference between the classic junk rig and the full batten
standing lug? In the classic junk rig, the battens are too stiff and
tend to bend the wrong way as the sail powers up. OTOH a standing lug,
if the leach & luff cloths are constructed properly, can be given full
battens and will benefit as much as a marconi from them... provided that
it's set to the lee side of the mast. If on the windward side, the part
of the sail fwd of the mast is basically a useless air brake (this may
be where having a sail made of burlap, or woven palm fronds, gains some
efficiency, as it will bleed off this high pressure pocket into the lee
side flow).




Sorry, I don't think that a heavy junk-rigged schooner


What do you define as 'heavy'? What displacement?


Do you insist on a single cut-off point? Personally, I tend to think of
anything over a D/L of 250 as being on the heavy side, and 350 as really
heavy. A lot of junk rigged boats are pushing 400, which is a crusher of
crab crushers.


... Short
tacking up a channel was effortless.


So is a gaff cat, or cat ketch, or sloop with no jib or self-tacking
jib... and a sloop with a small jib is not difficult.


True. Now, how do those rigs compare to the junk rig in terms of sail
area set?


Depends on the individual boat. There are fractional marconi sloops with
self-tacking jibs in the SA/D range of 20 and up. When you're talking
about 40 footers, that's some big sails.


I simply do not believe that you can build a fully battened Marconi rig
for anything like the price of a junk rig.

Why not? Go scrounge around a boat yard nowadays, you'll find lots of
2nd hand parts & components for such a rig... and darn few junk rig
parts.


Ummmmm, that might be because there are damn few - I hesitate to say
none - specific junk rig parts. Feel free to correct me by listing
some. Therefore, it's a wash at best.

I just did a Google search for used sail batten cars. Guess how many
sites selling them popped up? Nice round number........


heh heh and did you do a search for junk rig parts, too? After all, it
should be a fair comparison.



and the Marconi sails are more efficient.


Doug, Marconi sails are more efficient *to windward*, and only then if
in very good condition. As soon as they get saggy & baggy, the
efficiency goes to hell. On reaching & running the tall Marconi rig is
inefficient compared to almost anything else. I can't find any
authority that says different. Quote me one.


Well, I guess the fact that no development class racing boats are using
gaffs or junks or lugs counts for much, then? Shall we assume that these
guys who judge which boat rig is more efficient by the very simple and
direct expedient of racing them against each other, know absolutely
nothing about which rig is more efficient on a race course that demands
approximately equal distance going upwind & down?

Of course, for cruising, you're not going to be spending equal amounts
of time or distance sailing upwind... but it's still a vital
characteristic IMHO for keeping off lee shores if nothing else. And the
better a boat sails to windward, the wider choices you have of
destinations & the less you need your engine.



Quoting from:
http://www.kastenmarine.com/gaff_rig.htm
It is well known that higher aspect sails produce greater lift when
close hauled. It not so widely known however that high aspect sails
stall much more readily as the angle of attack widens.

Yep. And you know how to fix that wide angle of attack? Ease the sheet a
little bit.


For racing, where windward performance is of prime importance, it has
been shown that an aspect ratio greater than 6 is of little use on
monohull racing craft.

A big part of that is limits of materials, which is changing over time.
Look at how competition glider designs have evolved over the past 30
years with the advent of carbon/epoxy/foam sandwhich structures.


forth. By the time an angle of attack of 30 degrees is reached, the
favored position is handed off to a sail with an A/R of 1...!
The salient point is that extremely high aspect sails are not "bad"
sails, they are just not a requirement for general ocean cruising,
where it is rare to be sailing dead to windward. When required to do
so, sails with an A/R of from 3 to 4 will perform quite well when just
eased off a few degrees.
======================================

Do you disagree with this?


I think it's pretty much irrelevant, as you should never sail with your
sails at an angle of attack of 30 degrees to the apparent wind, unles
you're the Boobsy kind of sailor who just puts his sails up for
appearance and never adjusts the sheets.


Look, we're referring to cruising boats here, as that's what the
Gazelle is. That means few people doing boat handling for up to 30 days
at sea. Every extra sail you take means that much less space for other
gear & supplies. Seems to me that you're fixated on windward sailing
ability to the detriment of other factors.


Possibly. OTOH bringing along an asymmetric spinnaker for trade wind
sailing or drifter to get thru the doldrums is not that big a deal IMHO,
and adds very considerably to the boat's performance.




In other words, you want to stitch burlap bags together and hang it on a
rig assembled from odds & ends out of a discount plumber's supply? Be my
guest... I won't even fuss when you brag about how easy it is to control!


Come off it. Do you need mylar sails for cruising on a Marconi rigged
boat? They've got better material specs than Dacron. If you're not
using mylar, does that mean you're using the equiv of burlap?

Nope. Would you use Dacron for junk sails?

There are guys who vehemently argue in favor of using blue polypro tarp
material, or Tyvek house insulation film, for making boat sails. It
seems to work for them.

If that's what you want, regadless of real wordl factors, then fine. All
I'm saying is that in many cases, the more expensive material is
justified in both better performance and longevity. And good sails are
expensive.


... How about
rod rigging instead of 1x19 s/steel? Or galv wire instead of s/steel
wire?


Why not? At one time I was considering buying a boat with rod rigging,
if I had gone ahead should I have IYHO replaced it all (maybe with
galvanized) so as to make it cheaper & more reliable & more cost
effective? A strange way of saving money.

I don't know much about rod rigging, but I assume it's used on hi-end
racers because it's stronger. Seems to me like if it's set up properly
then on a less stressed rig on a boat used for cruising, it might last a
really long time.


That bit of argument is reminiscent of Bobsprit. When you can't refute
the point, go for the exaggeration and hope nobody notices.


You mean like insisting on that comparison of burlap to mylar sail
performance?



This particular vessel (Migrant) has been recorded as doing consistent
140+ mile days cruising over many passages & many years.

That's pretty good. OTOH it's also a big boat. 140 mile days on a 40' +
LWL is comparable to 90 mile days with a 32' LWL.


Except it's 35' LWL, 42' LOD IIRC. I'd need to check the exact figures
but that's close.


OK, that's a little better.


How many production boats have got to that number of
hulls in the water?


Only the ones that have been very successfully marketed... as have the
junk rigs!


Ah. Damn few to none, then, that you can find.


Hardly. Check the production runs for boats like the Catalina 27 or
Hunter 34, which you'll see examples of in harbors all over the place.
Not my own pick of a cruising boat, but they are cheap & readily
available, and people *have* sailed them to all sorts of places.

Shuck, they're getting close to Lightning # 17,000 now. And probably
Laser # 1,000,000 or so!

But there is a large and very vocal group of junk rig advocates, few of
whom have sailed as far as have the Catalina 27 guys. There are a few
more who really know what they're talking about, but then in the books
cited, they're insisting on comparing the junk to boats of 30+ years ago
(and only recounting those boat's worst attributes) and pointing to
Jester as though she were a hot-shot OSTAR winner. This is dishonest IMHO.



Weekend is here and I'm going sailing as I only have 4 weeks left in
this year. This can wait till next week or forever, depending........

A well thought out replay deserves a well thought out reply. The funny
thing is, the more we hammer this out, the closer we get to actually
agreeing on most points. The junk rig is just fine if that's what you
want, it's quite appropriate on some boats, and it will certainly get
you from port to port.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

Pete,

Not only a good downwind rig but of all rigs there is none that's reefs
easier. Just release halyard tension and the sail reduces to a new sheet
batten and your sailing with less sail.

I like my rig, with full batten main in Lazy jack & self furling 150 but
I do envy the Junks reefing ability.

I also like the junks, and Colvin hulls for their ability to dry out on
the beach for easy repairs.

Pete; A side bar on D. Johnson. I invited him aboard my Pilothouse 29
footer for coffee and a chance to look her over (Like a proud father)
After looking her over Dick asked who designed her. When I had no
answer, he looked at me in discuss. Finished his coffee and left. If you
are in contact with Tom Colvin you can confirm D. Johnson admiration for
his designing ability.

Thom, according to Tom Colvin, Dick put over 200K miles on Migrant
during his ownership including a hell of a lot of singlehanded sailing.
Not too shabby for a rig that according to Doug, can't go well to
windward and is an example of 17C technology.

Information I got is the owner after Dick had the interior foamed and
that's when the rust problems started. The survey when Dick sold her
was fine. The hull is Corten steel spray metallised with aluminium when
built, doubt the new plate is treated so tho apparently the welding was
well done. I think the only cure now would be to remove the interior
and the foam then find the bad plate, cut it out and go from there. No
economic point, so her life is now limited IMO.

PDW

In article , Thom
Stewart wrote:

Pete;

She looks a lot different!! She was all Gray and had wooden mast, with
the for mast cantered slightly foreward.

She looks nice!! I know her when---- ah but that was a different time.
She was a Sailor. A Real Sailor she was. Owned by a College Prof who had
time off to make long Voyages and he did.

Dick is gone and the Vessel we knew is no longer! Time leave only
memories to Old Sailors. Good Ones if you lived them right. "Migrant"
and Dick really lived them RIGHT.

He talked of the So Pacific and Asia like it was the next Harbor over.
They "rounded the world and the Pacific at Will. They went where ever
they wanted, at their will.

In article , DSK
wrote:

Thom Stewart wrote:

Pete;

There was a guy named; "Blondie Hassler" who put a Junk Sail on a deep
keel cut away hull. 26 feet long. He designed a wind powered self
steering system and sailed her around and around the world by himself.
The boat was named "Jester"

To this day, one of the toughest upwind, single handed races across the
Atlantic Ocean still carries a Class for small craft vessels named the
"JESTER CLASS" So much for Junk Sails not being able to go up wind. A
Folk Boat with a Single Junk Sail was the first winner and the class
carries the name.

Actually Thom, Jester never won the race.

Yeah, that's my memory too.

And while the owner after Hassler sailed that boat a heck of a lot, a
dozen or more Trans-Atlantics IIRC, he also gave up a number of voyages
because they turned into protracted sessions trying to beat to weather.

Right. I don't think anyone has tried a junk rig in a race with any
real expectation of winning.

PDW

I'm really pushed now, planning for sea trials in 4 weeks so...

In article , DSK
wrote:

OTOH, with no expenditure of money or maintenance time on sails &
rigging, the engine can get more attention and thus be prefectly reliable.

No such animal as a perfectly reliable mechanical device. Not even
Mooron's waffle faced hammer.

So - what do you mean by 'pretty well'? You're an engineer - give some
figures.


How about a requirement that the boat make a reasonable & reliable VMG,
with good steerageway & reliable in stays, in the roughest 10% of wind &
water conditions near the coasts where she is to be sailed? Assume that
anything rougher, like say a Gulf hurricane, will be avoided.

Hmmm. Seems the Hill's Badger can do this, and Colvin Gazelles. Dunno
any others but I don't really pay attention.....

For example, it's claimed (and to a large extent I agree) that the junk
rig is easy to handle. But most junk rigs are also small for the boats
they're on... sometimes pitifully small. Well, if it's truly easier to
handle then why don't junk rigs carry *more* sail area, rather than
less?

Lessee..... I've got some data on a Colvin Witch floating around here.
34' LOD, 27' LWL, 14400 lbs displacement.

Junk rig: 613 sq ft or 719 with fisherman.
Gaff schooner: 603 sq or 791
Gaff ketch: 553 sq ft

Only one datum point but either the ketch is *grossly* undercanvassed
or the junk rig isn't too shabby at all.

SARA GAMP is a Colvin Witch with a gaff ketch rig.

Why do we not see large, easily handled junk rigs on racing boats?

Because they'll always lose out going to windwards and racing boats are
specialised animals. Why don't you see a lot of 8' plus draft boats
cruising shoal waters? Because they become reef ornaments.....

Uh huh. And of course, those people are totally & completely unbiased,
and I'm sure they also have many years of experience (and success) with
modern high performance marconi rigs

Shrug. If the rigs didn't work, or worked as poorly as you seem to
think, do you really think the owners would stick with them? Dick
Johnson did 200K miles in his Colvin Gazelle. The Hills have over 100K
miles up on their dory.

I think we're back to the draft factor again. You're cherry picking. If
you put a highly efficient to windward rig on a shoal draft cruising
vessel, it ain't going to work too well. Keep the engineering params in
mind - it's a cruising vessel with shoal draft for gunkholing.

Sure, but if all else is equal, the marconi is still going to be better
at windward sailing.

Yeah, and worse at off-wind sailing. We agree on that.

This one of the basic trade-offs in picking the basic characteristics of
the boat... only after you've settled what you want in the way of LOA,
draft, tonnage, etc etc, should you then consider what is an appropriate
rig.

And in a way, the fact that you don't seem to consider the junk to be an
appropriate rig for a modern light displacement fin keeled racer-cruiser
shows that we are pretty much in agreement on this rig's basic
characateristics

Oh sure. I think it's a good cruising rig, on a hull designed for it.
It's not the perfect rig for all conditions. In fact when I was talking
this over with Tom, he advised me not to build one for sailing in high
latitudes & strong winds due to the rig's weight. His opinion was that
a schooner rig would be a lot better for the places I was thinking of
going, and I probably won't build one of them either so there you go...

Do you insist on a single cut-off point? Personally, I tend to think of
anything over a D/L of 250 as being on the heavy side, and 350 as really
heavy. A lot of junk rigged boats are pushing 400, which is a crusher of
crab crushers.

You mean, like Mooron's boat??????

I simply do not believe that you can build a fully battened Marconi rig
for anything like the price of a junk rig.

Why not? Go scrounge around a boat yard nowadays, you'll find lots of
2nd hand parts & components for such a rig... and darn few junk rig
parts.


Ummmmm, that might be because there are damn few - I hesitate to say
none - specific junk rig parts. Feel free to correct me by listing
some. Therefore, it's a wash at best.

I just did a Google search for used sail batten cars. Guess how many
sites selling them popped up? Nice round number........


heh heh and did you do a search for junk rig parts, too? After all, it
should be a fair comparison.

....... but we agree that there are no specialised parts needed in a
junk rig, so the comparison is nonsensical.

Doug, Marconi sails are more efficient *to windward*, and only then if
in very good condition. As soon as they get saggy & baggy, the
efficiency goes to hell. On reaching & running the tall Marconi rig is
inefficient compared to almost anything else. I can't find any
authority that says different. Quote me one.


Well, I guess the fact that no development class racing boats are using
gaffs or junks or lugs counts for much, then? Shall we assume that these
guys who judge which boat rig is more efficient by the very simple and
direct expedient of racing them against each other, know absolutely
nothing about which rig is more efficient on a race course that demands
approximately equal distance going upwind & down?

What would be interesting would be to:

1. limit draft to say 4' max.
2. limit number of sails aboard.
3. limit the number of crew to 2 or 3.
4. eliminate moveable ballast.
5. boats must recover from a 125deg knockdown
6. boats must be more stable right side up than upside down.
7. boats must sail with varying ballast up to 2000lbs for stores.

These are basic characteristics of cruising boats not racing boats. How
many racing boats could meet them?

This is just as defensible a set of criteria as who goes fastest around
the cans.......

Of course, for cruising, you're not going to be spending equal amounts
of time or distance sailing upwind... but it's still a vital
characteristic IMHO for keeping off lee shores if nothing else. And the
better a boat sails to windward, the wider choices you have of
destinations & the less you need your engine.

Which might have some validity except that we know from Donal that most
people (he knows) motor-sail 80% of the time, and *he* has a marconi
rig!

Look, we're referring to cruising boats here, as that's what the
Gazelle is. That means few people doing boat handling for up to 30 days
at sea. Every extra sail you take means that much less space for other
gear & supplies. Seems to me that you're fixated on windward sailing
ability to the detriment of other factors.


Possibly. OTOH bringing along an asymmetric spinnaker for trade wind
sailing or drifter to get thru the doldrums is not that big a deal IMHO,
and adds very considerably to the boat's performance.

Personally I think a good slow revving diesel using 2 liters/hr and
giving you 5 knots makes more sense.....

In other words, you want to stitch burlap bags together and hang it on a
rig assembled from odds & ends out of a discount plumber's supply? Be my
guest... I won't even fuss when you brag about how easy it is to control!


Come off it. Do you need mylar sails for cruising on a Marconi rigged
boat? They've got better material specs than Dacron. If you're not
using mylar, does that mean you're using the equiv of burlap?

Nope. Would you use Dacron for junk sails?

Probably. Or possibly Sunbrella canvas :-)

If that's what you want, regadless of real wordl factors, then fine. All
I'm saying is that in many cases, the more expensive material is
justified in both better performance and longevity. And good sails are
expensive.

Yeah but there's always a tradeoff point with materials. You go from
excellent to outrageously great with a price differential of maybe an
order of magnitude or more. The differential from crap to excellent
might only be a factor of 2 or 3. If you're racing and can pay the
freight, you pay whatever it costs. Otherwise, there might not be a lot
of point.



... How about
rod rigging instead of 1x19 s/steel? Or galv wire instead of s/steel
wire?


Why not? At one time I was considering buying a boat with rod rigging,
if I had gone ahead should I have IYHO replaced it all (maybe with
galvanized) so as to make it cheaper & more reliable & more cost
effective? A strange way of saving money.

Nope, but you'd need to think carefully about how & when you were going
to get it crack tested and the consequences of any part of it failing
if you were cruising Outer Slobbovia or equiv.


I don't know much about rod rigging, but I assume it's used on hi-end
racers because it's stronger.

Stiffer for the weight. Think of it as 1x1 wire.....

Seems to me like if it's set up properly
then on a less stressed rig on a boat used for cruising, it might last a
really long time.

Yeah. Might. But to my mind there's more than one consideration.

Likelihood of failure over pick a timespan

Cost of regular preventative maint.

Difficulty of regular preventative maint.

Consequences of catastrophic failure.

Pick where your comfort zone is. Racers don't care as long as it
doesn't break before finishing. Cruisers 10 days out of Galapagos
heading for Tahiti might have a different POV.

You've got to replace s/steel rigging wire every 10 years because the
risk of failure increases over time but there's no real good way of
telling visually. People still use it tho and morons like Bob even
think it's because it's structurally better than alternatives like galv
wire. S/steel is slightly stiffer which is an advantage for a highly
tuned racing rig, is all.



That bit of argument is reminiscent of Bobsprit. When you can't refute
the point, go for the exaggeration and hope nobody notices.


You mean like insisting on that comparison of burlap to mylar sail
performance?

Yep, that was one of yours except you used Dacron vs burlap. Heh.

How many production boats have got to that number of
hulls in the water?


Only the ones that have been very successfully marketed... as have the
junk rigs!


Ah. Damn few to none, then, that you can find.


Hardly. Check the production runs for boats like the Catalina 27 or
Hunter 34, which you'll see examples of in harbors all over the place.
Not my own pick of a cruising boat, but they are cheap & readily
available, and people *have* sailed them to all sorts of places.

Shuck, they're getting close to Lightning # 17,000 now. And probably
Laser # 1,000,000 or so!

OK they're production boats with volume sales. But most of them are
water toys not cruisers due to size. The Catalina 27 & Hunter 34 are
big enough tho.


But there is a large and very vocal group of junk rig advocates, few of
whom have sailed as far as have the Catalina 27 guys. There are a few
more who really know what they're talking about, but then in the books
cited, they're insisting on comparing the junk to boats of 30+ years ago
(and only recounting those boat's worst attributes) and pointing to
Jester as though she were a hot-shot OSTAR winner. This is dishonest IMHO.

Dumb too. Too easy to shoot them down. Like Bob in fact.

Weekend is here and I'm going sailing as I only have 4 weeks left in
this year. This can wait till next week or forever, depending........

A well thought out replay deserves a well thought out reply. The funny
thing is, the more we hammer this out, the closer we get to actually
agreeing on most points. The junk rig is just fine if that's what you
want, it's quite appropriate on some boats, and it will certainly get
you from port to port.

I'm probably going to spend 24/7 listening to diesels running for 6
weeks straight RSN. Something nice & quiet like a sailboat would be
much appreciated when I get back.......

PDW

In article , Thom
Stewart wrote:

Pete,

Not only a good downwind rig but of all rigs there is none that's reefs
easier. Just release halyard tension and the sail reduces to a new sheet
batten and your sailing with less sail.

I like my rig, with full batten main in Lazy jack & self furling 150 but
I do envy the Junks reefing ability.

I also like the junks, and Colvin hulls for their ability to dry out on
the beach for easy repairs.

Pete; A side bar on D. Johnson. I invited him aboard my Pilothouse 29
footer for coffee and a chance to look her over (Like a proud father)
After looking her over Dick asked who designed her. When I had no
answer, he looked at me in discuss. Finished his coffee and left. If you
are in contact with Tom Colvin you can confirm D. Johnson admiration for
his designing ability.

Yeah. Tom was the one who told me that Dick had done over 200K miles on
MIGRANT including a singlehanded trip around Tasmania when he was in
his 70's. Tom has pretty fixed opinions but has the sea miles and
designs to make them worth listening to even if you don't agree. He's
never, AFAIK, designed racing boats so Doug's ideas of what a boat
needs don't seem to feature too highly.

Not so long ago a guy named Bernie Harberts did a s/h circumnav in a
Colvin Witch named SEABIRD. He passed thru Torres Strait so I didn't
get a chance to look over his boat. It was a ketch rig that he
converted to cutter in NZ. Had nothing but good things to say about it
including the ability to dry out & antifoul when he wanted to.

There are a lot of Gazelle hulls out there. Not so many Witches, about
120 built and if SARA GAMP isn't recovered, that'll be one less afloat
unfortunately. I had an opportunity to buy a Gazelle a couple years
back but decided it was too much money and boat for my needs at the
time. That one had a marconi ketch rig.

If MIGRANT hasn't sold by the time I get back from my next trip I might
go take a look, maybe make a real lowball offer. Malaysia is a nice
place for a holiday and only 8 hours or so flying time away.

PDW