I asked the guys at Sailing Anarchy about the backstayless racer and the
kite that we were discussing. Check out the designers answer:
http://www.sailinganarchy.com/

Thanks for the input Gary. However I still would not
under any circumstances take the main down until
removing the load on the gennaker. In particular, if I
had an expensive carbon fiber mast, I would never risk it.

All Rob Shaws' designs, but one, are small boats. The
largest 10 meter boat does not have masthead support
per his answer at Sailing Anarchy.

BTW, the Cheetah 30 was designed by Bob Ames.

http://www.bana.com/cheetah/descomnt.htm

I wrote Bob Ames to see what his answer is. I'll report back
when I get it.


"Gary" wrote
I asked the guys at Sailing Anarchy about the backstayless racer and the
kite that we were discussing. Check out the designers answer:
http://www.sailinganarchy.com/

Bart Senior wrote:
Thanks for the input Gary. However I still would not
under any circumstances take the main down until
removing the load on the gennaker. In particular, if I
had an expensive carbon fiber mast, I would never risk it.

All Rob Shaws' designs, but one, are small boats. The
largest 10 meter boat does not have masthead support
per his answer at Sailing Anarchy.

BTW, the Cheetah 30 was designed by Bob Ames.

http://www.bana.com/cheetah/descomnt.htm

I wrote Bob Ames to see what his answer is. I'll report back
when I get it.


"Gary" wrote

I asked the guys at Sailing Anarchy about the backstayless racer and the
kite that we were discussing. Check out the designers answer:
http://www.sailinganarchy.com/



Great idea. I think you'll find that the rig is as strong as if it had
a backstay. I would take the chance. If it broke then it wasn't strong
enough anyway.

Gary wrote:

I asked the guys at Sailing Anarchy about the backstayless racer and the
kite that we were discussing. Check out the designers answer:
http://www.sailinganarchy.com/

I saw that, but didn't think of our earlier discussion. For
one thing, the rig of the Shaw boats is a bit different, the
upper stays go right to the mast head. He says the main
doesn't add any support, but I'm not convinced. If you look
at the picture lower down on the same page of the Shaw 25,
the main is not eased very much (it's not on the spin sheet,
which runs to 1/2 way out the rack) and the leach is only
slightly open. This is in fairly light air though.

While I agree that "if it breaks, it wasn't strong enough"
there are certain things you should not expect to do with
certain boats.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

DSK wrote:
Gary wrote:

I asked the guys at Sailing Anarchy about the backstayless racer and
the kite that we were discussing. Check out the designers answer:
http://www.sailinganarchy.com/


I saw that, but didn't think of our earlier discussion. For one thing,
the rig of the Shaw boats is a bit different, the upper stays go right
to the mast head. He says the main doesn't add any support, but I'm not
convinced. If you look at the picture lower down on the same page of the
Shaw 25, the main is not eased very much (it's not on the spin sheet,
which runs to 1/2 way out the rack) and the leach is only slightly open.
This is in fairly light air though.

It's out far enough to have the lee spreader pressing against it. Like
Mr. Shaw says in his answer, "We run the gennaker on a tight reach with
the main inside out often so it's not doing much for you then. "

In that photo, the main is certainly not holding the mast up

While I agree that "if it breaks, it wasn't strong enough" there are
certain things you should not expect to do with certain boats.

I think I have to go with the designers comments. He trumps you.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

...If you look at the picture lower down on the same page
of the Shaw 25, the main is not eased very much...

Gary wrote:
It's out far enough to have the lee spreader pressing against it.

Where?
I see the shadow of the spreaders thru the sail, but I don't
see any place at all... even at the uppermost set... where
the spreaders are pressing inward on the sail. Look at the
batten curve above the sail number.



... Like
Mr. Shaw says in his answer, "We run the gennaker on a tight reach with
the main inside out often so it's not doing much for you then. "


I don't quite see this. The main can be totally flogging on
a tight reach and still have leach tension. And in the
earlier discussion, we weren't talking about a tight reach
either.

In that photo, the main is certainly not holding the mast up

Of course not, there's a giant invisible hand


Gary wrote:
I think I have to go with the designers comments. He trumps you.


Sorry, I didn't realize it was a poker game. He also wasn't
talking about the same boat with the same rig.

Considering that a number of sport boats with frac rigs &
mast head chuts *have* broken their masts, it's kinda dumb
to insist that it can't happen. It's nice that Shaw's design
incorporate cap stays to help keep the mast together...
maybe that's why he put them there.

It's also stupid to insist that a boat (especially a
performance boat) should be totally bulletproof in all
situations. Back in the boom years, a local aircraft company
decided to cash in on their fiberglass molding facility by
building a small racing one-design... a cool boat (the
Skylark) but very heavy... over 200# for a 14 footer. My
father and I were invited to help intorduce them and we
sailed them a bunch of places, and I remember asking one of
the builders 'why did you make the hull so heavy?' and he
replied that it was for strength. He said "The first few
ones we built, we did make them a lot lighter, but you could
just smash in the hull with a hammer and we wanted it
stronger than that."

Ask Mr. Shaw if his boats are totally hammer proof.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

DSK wrote:
...If you look at the picture lower down on the same page of the Shaw
25, the main is not eased very much...


Gary wrote:

It's out far enough to have the lee spreader pressing against it.


Where?
I see the shadow of the spreaders thru the sail, but I don't see any
place at all... even at the uppermost set... where the spreaders are
pressing inward on the sail. Look at the batten curve above the sail
number.
Lowers, wrinkles.



... Like Mr. Shaw says in his answer, "We run the gennaker on a tight
reach with the main inside out often so it's not doing much for you
then. "


I don't quite see this. The main can be totally flogging on a tight
reach and still have leach tension. And in the earlier discussion, we
weren't talking about a tight reach either.
My point is , the main provides the most support when sheeted tight.
His point is the main doesn't provide much lift, just balance.

In that photo, the main is certainly not holding the mast up


Of course not, there's a giant invisible hand


Gary wrote:

I think I have to go with the designers comments. He trumps you.


Sorry, I didn't realize it was a poker game. He also wasn't talking
about the same boat with the same rig.
Rig/boat design (racing) is a poker game. Those designs that have the
upper section snap off are bad designs. The sailing world is full of
crap designs.

Considering that a number of sport boats with frac rigs & mast head
chuts *have* broken their masts, it's kinda dumb to insist that it can't
happen. It's nice that Shaw's design incorporate cap stays to help keep
the mast together... maybe that's why he put them there.
Not nice but good design.

It's also stupid to insist that a boat (especially a performance boat)
should be totally bulletproof in all situations.
That is stupid. Nobody wants a boat that stays together in all
situations?????????

Back in the boom years,
a local aircraft company decided to cash in on their fiberglass molding
facility by building a small racing one-design... a cool boat (the
Skylark) but very heavy... over 200# for a 14 footer. My father and I
were invited to help intorduce them and we sailed them a bunch of
places, and I remember asking one of the builders 'why did you make the
hull so heavy?' and he replied that it was for strength. He said "The
first few ones we built, we did make them a lot lighter, but you could
just smash in the hull with a hammer and we wanted it stronger than that."

Ask Mr. Shaw if his boats are totally hammer proof.
??????

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

.... I don't see any
place at all... where the spreaders are
pressing inward on the sail.

Gary wrote:
Lowers, wrinkles.


Nope, I don't see it. Maybe if you loan me your glasses?

How are the lowers going to press against the main when the
boom iis barely eased past the gun'l?


My point is , the main provides the most support when sheeted tight.

Agreed.

... His
point is the main doesn't provide much lift, just balance.


That doesn't mean it can't also support the mast, especially
in a boat with*out* capstays.


Rig/boat design (racing) is a poker game. Those designs that have the
upper section snap off are bad designs.

???

Thos designs which have the upper mast section snap off when
the design parameters are exceeded... by a LOT... are bad
designs?

I guess IYHO if a place crashes when the pilot aims it
straight towards the ground and jams on full throttle is
also a "bad design"?

... The sailing world is full of
crap designs.

Agreed.
Mostly because that's what seems to sell.


... It's nice that Shaw's design incorporate cap stays to
help keep the mast together... maybe that's why he put them there.

Not nice but good design.

They also add weight windage & cost. If that makes the boat
slower under common circumstances, then it's bad design.

It's a trade-off.


It's also stupid to insist that a boat (especially a performance boat)
should be totally bulletproof in all situations.

That is stupid. Nobody wants a boat that stays together in all
situations?????????

Does your boat stay together if it is lifted by a dirigible
and dropped onto a parking lot from an altitude of 12,000'?
Oh wait, your boat isn't designed to withstand that!

Guess what, some sport boats are not designed to sail with
no mainsail leach tension in 30 knots.

DSK