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

"Roger Long" wrote in
:

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



Many of the quartz-iodine driving lamps are made of plastic. They are
really bright but not much of a flood light.

--
Larry

You know you've had a rough night when you wake up and your outlined in
chalk.

Well. I don't expect to have the kids out doing Genoa changes in the
middle of the night and will be pretty loath to turn the thing on
anyway because of night vision. Even if the beam is tightly focused,
it's only 15 feet from the mast to the cockpit on our boat. Lighting
up the dinghy when boarding and unboarding at night should be the
major use.

--

Roger Long

I'd isolate it just to conform with standard.

"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

"barry lawson" wrote in message
u...
I'd isolate it just to conform with standard.

I came to the same conclusion but ran out of time. The nylon bolts
that would have let me do that in the hour I had before the crane
arrived weren't available in metric.

The body would have been electrically connected to ground anyway
through the rig and bonding system. I think the essential point is to
have a wire running back for everything to avoid voltage differentials
and not use things like masts and stays as the return wire as is done
on cars and smaller aircraft.
I have that. Well above the waterline, I really can't see any
downside to this additional electrical connection except for the issue
at the top.

--

Roger Long

Roger Long wrote:
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.


Me, too.

On all three of my boats that were luxurious enough to afford
spreader lights, I found them all the same, using the mast as a
ground for an automotive style lamp with chassis ground.

As a technician with 30 years experience, I wondered about the code,
best practices, and common sense. I was loathe to go to much extent
with an accessory that I actually never used except in demonstrations.

Then, my most recent boat, a fiberglass 29' bilge keeler, was struck
repeatedly by a big bolt of lightning. It chewed 25 holes the size
of dimes and quarters in the upper starboard foreward quarter of the
mast, in an almost neat line, about 6" apart, all on the most curved
section of the extrusion. The souvenier mast is hanging in the
spruce trees in my back yard, as a demontration of the logic of
lightning. The boat was moored to a dock, plugged in to shore power,
in fresh water.

There was no other damage to the boat or it's electrical system,
save for a new one drip per minute leak around the keel bolt.

After this experience, I am not going to change the way it is set
up. It seems whatever the method, it is as good as it could be.

The mast is grounded to an external cast iron keel with a heavy,
relatively straight wire, using only the 4 tabernacle bolts to
penetrate the overhead, connecting to a flat metal plate atop the
wooden king post. The only other electrical connection to the rig
topside was the VHF radio coax to the antenna, and a smallish wire
(#12?) from the shore power electrical outlet green wire in the
saloon to a portside centre shroud chainplate, which I had
disconnected. A DC system grounding plate is located close to the
engine, and is (naturally) smothered in antifouling. The spreader
light, masthead anchor light and steaming lights will not work if
the antenna is disconnected from the radio. If I ever get a trilight
at the masthead, it will use the same ground. How dare anyone say
this in not the right way to do it?

I admit, it is a case of the cobbler's shoes, and the busman's
holiday. I spend time on the boat to relax, and not to mither about
silly things like paint or electrocution or sinking. I figure, if
God wants to make me into a sparkler or fish food, I ain't gonna do
much about it.

As a comm site chief radio tech, I have seen all the stuff that
engineers do to protect million dollar rotating yagis pushing 10
kilowatts at HF freqs, including CB radio freqs, whom I am told, our
operators might on occasion answer from boredom if hams would ask us
for radio checks, on unauthorised occasions, just for fun, once a
year or so. While we did not to my knowledge actually burn up any
mobile rig receivers or their vehicles, we never got asked twice for
a radio check from local CB'ers. Our only antenna damage ever
suffered was from bird crap and from the winds, which did break one
of our HF yagi spreader arms right down into the dirt.

I think your spreader light setup is just fine.

YMMV.

Terry K

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

Well, excuuuse me.

Please, tell me the risks.

--

Roger Long



"Steve Lusardi" wrote in message
...
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

Rodger,
The risk is electrical corrosion and the generation of stray currents.
Although it is also important in a car, it is more important on a boat in
salt water, as salt water is an incredibly good electrolyte. Each electric
consumer must have its own return path. Never use a bond for a return path.
In fact, bonds should be avoided if at all possible, because bonds can act
like antennas. Your goal is to create circuits only where there is a
consumer. Stray currents cause corrosion and wood rot. Stray currents can be
caused by a multitude of things, like dissimilar metals (electrolysis), auto
transformer action from RF emissions and safety earth connections to shore
power. Sources of stray currents are notoriously difficult to detect, let
alone find. We use sacrificial anodes to fight against electric corrosion,
but they are a Band-Aid, not a cure. How often have we seen bronze
propellers wear out, but we know that if we take the same propeller and toss
it into the ocean for a hundred years it will reemerge as pristine as when
it was tossed. If you violate the rules, be prepared for the consequences.
Steve

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
Well, excuuuse me.

Please, tell me the risks.

--

Roger Long



"Steve Lusardi" wrote in message
...
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

An excellent dissertation on the subject. Thank you.

If this light were something down in the hull and the very salty
environment, or if it were something that was on and active more than
a few minutes a few times a season, I would isolate it for exactly the
reasons you state. Note that I am NOT using the mast as a return path
but have a complete black wire to the ground bus to which the mast is
connected anyway.

I actually do understand the issues which is why I am comfortable
violating them in this limited case but its instructive to all to stir
up these little debates.

--

Roger Long



"Steve Lusardi" wrote in message
...
Rodger,
The risk is electrical corrosion and the generation of stray
currents. Although it is also important in a car, it is more
important on a boat in salt water, as salt water is an incredibly
good electrolyte. Each electric consumer must have its own return
path. Never use a bond for a return path. In fact, bonds should be
avoided if at all possible, because bonds can act like antennas.
Your goal is to create circuits only where there is a consumer.
Stray currents cause corrosion and wood rot. Stray currents can be
caused by a multitude of things, like dissimilar metals
(electrolysis), auto transformer action from RF emissions and safety
earth connections to shore power. Sources of stray currents are
notoriously difficult to detect, let alone find. We use sacrificial
anodes to fight against electric corrosion, but they are a Band-Aid,
not a cure. How often have we seen bronze propellers wear out, but
we know that if we take the same propeller and toss it into the
ocean for a hundred years it will reemerge as pristine as when it
was tossed. If you violate the rules, be prepared for the
consequences.
Steve

"Roger Long" wrote in message
...
Well, excuuuse me.

Please, tell me the risks.

--

Roger Long



"Steve Lusardi" wrote in message
...
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