On Sun, 7 Oct 2007 21:22:48 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
wrote:

"perfectly sound forestay" and "nicked forestay" are mutually
exclusive terms.

Yes, and your insurance company will be quick to point out that
difference if they are asked to pay for a dismasting. Most policies
have exclusions for incidents caused by lack of maintenance, etc., and
many companies are all to quick to look for ways to avoid paying a
major claim. It will be an interesting conversation when you start
explaining to the adjustors how you relieved the stress points on the
damaged strands by filing them down.

On 2007-10-07 19:44:16 -0400, said:

I've managed to put two nicks in the 1/19 stainless forestay on my 32'
boat. Dont ask how, far too embarassing, suffice to say a hack saw got
drawn across the wire. Nothing was cut through, but two small chunks
got taken out of two strands. How dangerous is this?

Dangerous enough that my only thought is to replace it.

Demastings aren't any fun, and you've degraded that stay by about 20 percent.

--
Jere Lull
Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's new pages: http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI pages: http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

On Oct 8, 3:56 am, Jere Lull wrote:
On 2007-10-07 19:44:16 -0400, said:

I've managed to put two nicks in the 1/19 stainless forestay on my 32'
boat. Dont ask how, far too embarassing, suffice to say a hack saw got
drawn across the wire. Nothing was cut through, but two small chunks
got taken out of two strands. How dangerous is this?

Dangerous enough that my only thought is to replace it.

Demastings aren't any fun, and you've degraded that stay by about 20 percent.

--
Jere Lull
Tanzer 28 #4 out of Tolchester, MD
Xan's new pages:http://web.mac.com/jerelull/iWeb/Xan/
Our BVI pages:http://homepage.mac.com/jerelull/BVI/

Since when does 17/19 become 20%? If your only thought is to replace
it, you need to think more because your logic means that you should
make it safer by going from 19 strands to 21 to be even safer. On a
scale of relative dangers, one he deals with the nicks this becomes a
very small danger compared to almost anything else on a boat. Your
average marine head would be far more dangerous.

Frog,

The man complained of nicking a couple of strands. He did not tell us how
old or what the "general" condition of the forestay is. Why do you conclude
that after your repair this forestay would be perfectly sound? You made
sense with the stress stuff but now you're trying to win an argument by
blowing smoke

Dave M.

"David Martel" wrote
The man complained of nicking a couple of strands. He did not tell us how
old or what the "general" condition of the forestay is.

One man's nick is another man's gouge. The OP didn't really provide any
clues as to how much damage the hacksaw (?!) did. The strands might be
scratched, or they might be nearly severed.

On Oct 8, 9:49 am, "Ernest Scribbler"
wrote:
"David Martel" wrote

The man complained of nicking a couple of strands. He did not tell us how
old or what the "general" condition of the forestay is.

One man's nick is another man's gouge. The OP didn't really provide any
clues as to how much damage the hacksaw (?!) did. The strands might be
scratched, or they might be nearly severed.

I simply made a generalization concerning safety of aged wire. I said
nothing about the age of his wire but was simply saying that most
sailboats have wire that should be considered unsafe relative to new
wire that has been "nicked" and then filed. If his wire is old he
should replace it anyway.
He called it a nick, not a gouge. If he was truly concerned, he would
have called it a gouge.
This is all about relative risk. I feel (no proof supplied) that the
risk is minor compared to most things that you do not worry about but
should.
BTW, if this was rod rigging, he would be in serious danger until he
smoothed the nick.
I have looked over various failed (or nearly failed) wire and it
almost always fails at the fitting, not at the wire in spite of some
seriously bad wire I have seen. This was not a scientific survey but
simply a general impression.

On Oct 8, 10:15 am, Frogwatch wrote:
On Oct 8, 9:49 am, "Ernest Scribbler"
wrote:

"David Martel" wrote

The man complained of nicking a couple of strands. He did not tell us how
old or what the "general" condition of the forestay is.

One man's nick is another man's gouge. The OP didn't really provide any
clues as to how much damage the hacksaw (?!) did. The strands might be
scratched, or they might be nearly severed.

I simply made a generalization concerning safety of aged wire. I said
nothing about the age of his wire but was simply saying that most
sailboats have wire that should be considered unsafe relative to new
wire that has been "nicked" and then filed. If his wire is old he
should replace it anyway.
He called it a nick, not a gouge. If he was truly concerned, he would
have called it a gouge.
This is all about relative risk. I feel (no proof supplied) that the
risk is minor compared to most things that you do not worry about but
should.
BTW, if this was rod rigging, he would be in serious danger until he
smoothed the nick.
I have looked over various failed (or nearly failed) wire and it
almost always fails at the fitting, not at the wire in spite of some
seriously bad wire I have seen. This was not a scientific survey but
simply a general impression.

Here is a web site about rigging failu

http://dixielandmarine.com/yachts/DLrigprob.html

Oddly, they do not address failure of the actual wire. However, they
do discuss replacing cracked fittings by cutting the wire and then
using a longer fitting. This might be a reasonable thing to do if the
"nick" is close to the fitting and the wire is fairly new.

Frogwatch wrote:

Since when does 17/19 become 20%? If your only thought is to replace
it, you need to think more because your logic means that you should
make it safer by going from 19 strands to 21 to be even safer. On a
scale of relative dangers, one he deals with the nicks this becomes a
very small danger compared to almost anything else on a boat. Your
average marine head would be far more dangerous.


I'm in the replacement camp here, but think that probably the overall
failure probability hasn't been increased by the nick / filing. Most
failures of standing rigging I've seen happen at the fitting which is
less strong than the wire. Thus if you have a wire section at 90% of
strength, it's probably still not the weakest link.

However, if you were to experience a failure at the nick point, the
insurance adjuster would probably deny the claim.

-paul

On Oct 8, 1:29 pm, Paul Cassel
wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
Since when does 17/19 become 20%? If your only thought is to replace
it, you need to think more because your logic means that you should
make it safer by going from 19 strands to 21 to be even safer. On a
scale of relative dangers, one he deals with the nicks this becomes a
very small danger compared to almost anything else on a boat. Your
average marine head would be far more dangerous.

I'm in the replacement camp here, but think that probably the overall
failure probability hasn't been increased by the nick / filing. Most
failures of standing rigging I've seen happen at the fitting which is
less strong than the wire. Thus if you have a wire section at 90% of
strength, it's probably still not the weakest link.

However, if you were to experience a failure at the nick point, the
insurance adjuster would probably deny the claim.

-paul

The insurance thing is probably correct. However, this simply points
out that even those who are paid to assess risk often do a poor job of
it (although this is really an example of opportunism to deny a legit
claim). Most people think their marine heads are perfectly safe but
in reality they are fairly dangerous. However, insurance routinely
pays for sinkings resulting from siphoning heads. I consider this to
be such a serious issue that I took the marine head off my boat. A
friend of mine was taking a boat across the Gulf of mexico from N. Fl
to Sarasota. Somehow the anti-siphon loop got clogged and it back-
siphoned filling the boat with water. By the time anybody down below
woke up, the cabin sole was awash and they had to call the CG to bring
them a pump.
As far as REAL risk goes, the strength of the forestay is effectively
increased by the strength of the wire in the luff of the jib. Another
friend routinely winches his jib up so taut that he makes the forestay
go slack (too much I think).
Many of us in older boats only carry liability insurance so it would
not pay anyway unless someone else got hurt.

Frogwatch wrote:
A
friend of mine was taking a boat across the Gulf of mexico from N. Fl
to Sarasota. Somehow the anti-siphon loop got clogged and it back-
siphoned filling the boat with water. By the time anybody down below
woke up, the cabin sole was awash and they had to call the CG to bring
them a pump.

You know folks who do blue water sailing without a bilge pump?