On Oct 8, 3:08 pm, Paul Cassel
wrote:
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?

With that much water, a bilge pump would have been slow.

On 2007-10-08 08:06:34 -0400, Frogwatch said:

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.

Since when does 17/19 become 20%?

You're right. Should be 10% (2/19 rounded). (I was up WAY too late
after a great sail that brought the bow past the outer breakwater as
the sun kissed the horizon.)

Yes, the stay is probably okay, but I don't play around with the
forestay in particular. The OP *saw* two nicks. Are there perhaps
others he hasn't noticed?

Our previous boat was sideswiped, taking out two stays. Surveyor (and
I) didn't see anything wrong with the others. A bit later in the season
as we blew home under chute, I happened to notice that the backstay had
unravelled at a fitting. We were two strands away from losing that mast
from "hidden" damage.

--
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 2007-10-08 14:11:25 -0400, Frogwatch said:

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.

There is a middle ground: close the sea cock(s) while under way. Since
we're on the Chesapeake with ample numbers of working pump-out
stations, our through-hull is capped.

I wouldn't have my favorite cruising partner if I removed the head.

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.

IF the jib depends upon a halyard from the masthead. Our Flexible
Furler has an internal halyard.

Come to think about it, I don't believe our jibs have wire luffs, but
even without it, the bolt rope and material would do the job for a
short bit.

--
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 7, 7:44 pm, wrote:
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?

here's the orginal poster back. The stay is four years old, the nicks
are nicks, not gouges. Perhaps 1/8 of the strand's total diameter?
Point about I already know the answer is well taken. I shall have to
pay for my stupidity, as it aint worth the dismasting. (Just consider
the deductible!)

On 2007-10-08 19:58:31 -0400, said:

On Oct 7, 7:44 pm, wrote:
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?

here's the orginal poster back. The stay is four years old, the nicks
are nicks, not gouges. Perhaps 1/8 of the strand's total diameter?
Point about I already know the answer is well taken. I shall have to
pay for my stupidity, as it aint worth the dismasting. (Just consider
the deductible!)

Thank you!

I love it when a questioner comes back and says what he/she decided,
based upon our collective opinions.

Expect you won't be using the forestay as a sawing surface again.... ;-)

[Don't worry, all of us who have been around for a while have done
stupider things. Some of us are strong enough to admit to them. (I'm
not sure I'm one of that crowd.)]

--
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 Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:47:02 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:


[Don't worry, all of us who have been around for a while have done
stupider things. Some of us are strong enough to admit to them. (I'm
not sure I'm one of that crowd.)]

I made up stays with crimped ferrules this Spring. In the first good
blow on a lake one lower main stay came adrift; the upper held up the
mast, while it bowed, interestingly, until I took in sail.

When I looked at my ferrule crimp, I saw that I had been unhappy with
the out of round crimp, and had recrimped it at right angles.

That's a very good thing not to do. Double ferrules lead to peace of
mind too, I decided.

Brian Whatcott Altus OK

On Oct 8, 9:05 pm, Brian Whatcott wrote:
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:47:02 GMT, Jere Lull wrote:
[Don't worry, all of us who have been around for a while have done
stupider things. Some of us are strong enough to admit to them. (I'm
not sure I'm one of that crowd.)]

I made up stays with crimped ferrules this Spring. In the first good
blow on a lake one lower main stay came adrift; the upper held up the
mast, while it bowed, interestingly, until I took in sail.

When I looked at my ferrule crimp, I saw that I had been unhappy with
the out of round crimp, and had recrimped it at right angles.

That's a very good thing not to do. Double ferrules lead to peace of
mind too, I decided.

Brian Whatcott Altus OK

I wish I'd gone with Norseman or Staylok instead of swaged terminals
when I rerigged. From what I see on the web, they last much longer
with no cracking of the swaged area. I kept all my old rigging
intending to post pics of the tiny nearly invisible cracks in them but
that site I posted a link to had a good pic of such.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:22:30 -0700, Frogwatch
wrote:

I wish I'd gone with Norseman or Staylok instead of swaged terminals
when I rerigged. From what I see on the web, they last much longer
with no cracking of the swaged area.

I think that's a good plan if you have a way to load test them to SWL
off the boat. Otherwise you really need a *lot* of confidence in your
workmanship.

On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 11:29:22 -0600, Paul Cassel
wrote:

'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.

What is the safety factor? That is the real question. If it is large
that would be one thing.

Casady

So, lemme see...

2 of the 19 strands, 10.5%, have the POTENTIAL to fail before the other 17.