Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#9
![]()
posted to alt.sailing.asa
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
BUT, the overall area of the sail is LESS!
Now why would you not want a sail that hoists to the black band? The hoist of my sail is about 4.5 inches short according to the specs from Beneteau USA and the original sail. The roach is 8.5%. The old sail head went to a fairly sharp point and had little or no roach. The new sail has a broader headboard and so that "point" is missing. The loss of sail area at the top is not even a single square foot. Lying both sails on top of eachother revealed the foot to about the same, but the roach was far greater than the original 35s5 sail. There is no doubt that the new kevlar sail is larger...none at all. I think you're working out the geometry based on cutting at the foot, which would result in a great loss of sail area. Visualize a triangle. Cut a foot off the base is far more area than a foot off the tip. Being a large mained fractional rig, this current sail was found to be excellent both in this material and the less exotic version it was coppied from...that sail being from North. After posting all of the pics, talking with my loft and checking the main at Doyle there is no doubt....except in the small mind of Sloco. As far as the black band goes, my 35s5 has none. When we hoisted the main we were positive it was hoisting further up that the original main, which was odd. Again, none of this matters in the least. RB 35s5 NY |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Viscous Drag Calculations For Ship Hull Geometry + other links | Cruising | |||
Building a wooden WW dory | General |