Sail recommendation for a stinkpot

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by Scout 30

I hate to say this because I truly love the look of classic motorsailers but this is a lesson in futility. Considering the large size of your boat & small amount of canvas you'll be able to raise there will be little or no measurable effect.

You could be right, but I am not so sure. Idle on this engine is 600 rpm, and at that with the prop correctly pitched she does around 4 knots. The hp chart doesn't go that low, but at 1200 rpm the prop demand is only 44 hp, and at 1300 it is 56 hp. So maybe at idle it is putting out 20 hp or so prop demand? Beats me, but if I add 10 hp worth of propulsion from the wind, won't I get a some good portion of a knot out of that?

[TrentePieds]

Quote: "...I built the boom for the main mast with an inner section that extends out 4' using a hydraulic boom inside the main boom,..."


Good thinking :-)! It was, of course, precisely this sort of "outside the box" thinking that drove the modification of the canvas-carrying mainmast in Nordsøkutters into the cargo-handling gear in the modern boats.


Now, while we are outside the box, there is a wonderful alternative to such labout and attention intensive sails as drifters and spinnakers which IMO have NO place in shorthanded cruising boats. We can again go back to the antecedents of the Nordsøkutters - the Viking men-o-war ("longships" in English, though called Drakar, Skeidar, Bussar or Sudar in Old Norse) and cargo carriers known in Old Norse as Byrdingar, Karvar and Snekkar (the "ar" ending is merely the plural form of these nouns).

All these types of ships had their masts stepped amidships because that permitted the ships to be balanced when on the wind under the huge, well-known square-sails they carried on a yard run up the mast on parrels. A well handled longship could, say people who have sailed replicas, be held two points above the beam reach.

You may remember a little gaff ketch designed by Thomas Day in 1901 called "Seabird". She crossed the Atlantic in 1911. Day equipped her with a square sail that he and his mates called the "silly sail" (I think it was). It was far from a silly sail because it saved a lot of wear and tear on crew and gear. My present boat, a 30-foot sloop, has had her rig "improved" by a prior owner who was clearly a little weak on the fundamental concepts. He replaced a perfectly good main on slides with a mast-furling, roller-furling rig, much to the boat's detriment. That's why we got her for dirt cheap :-) If I could expect to be an active sailer for a greater span of years than I really can, and could therefore justify the expense, I would rig TrentePieds with a "silly sail". To do that, however, would entail going back to a proper rig innocent of that god-forsaken main furling gear.

By my lights, IF it were possible to accommodate a square sail on your existing spars, that, it would seem to me, would be the way to go. The impediment would be those forward-reaching tri-pod legs, but maybe you can find a way around that, for squaresails are loose-footed. Given the forward position of the mast you would not be able to hold her even as high as a beam reach , but that, as I understood your first post, wouldn't matter, since apparently your intent is just to have a wind-assist when you are well and truly off the wind.

All the best, whatever you do :-)!

TP

[jimcarrier]

I'm curious whether the existing rudder will be efficient with any downwind sail configuration? This really only becomes a big issue if you lose an engine and need to point.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by TrentePieds

Quote: "...I built the boom for the main mast with an inner section that extends out 4' using a hydraulic boom inside the main boom,..."


Good thinking :-)! It was, of course, precisely this sort of "outside the box" thinking that drove the modification of the canvas-carrying mainmast in Nordsøkutters into the cargo-handling gear in the modern boats.


Now, while we are outside the box, there is a wonderful alternative to such labout and attention intensive sails as drifters and spinnakers which IMO have NO place in shorthanded cruising boats. We can again go back to the antecedents of the Nordsøkutters - the Viking men-o-war ("longships" in English, though called Drakar, Skeidar, Bussar or Sudar in Old Norse) and cargo carriers known in Old Norse as Byrdingar, Karvar and Snekkar (the "ar" ending is merely the plural form of these nouns).

All these types of ships had their masts stepped amidships because that permitted the ships to be balanced when on the wind under the huge, well-known square-sails they carried on a yard run up the mast on parrels. A well handled longship could, say people who have sailed replicas, be held two points above the beam reach.

You may remember a little gaff ketch designed by Thomas Day in 1901 called "Seabird". She crossed the Atlantic in 1911. Day equipped her with a square sail that he and his mates called the "silly sail" (I think it was). It was far from a silly sail because it saved a lot of wear and tear on crew and gear. My present boat, a 30-foot sloop, has had her rig "improved" by a prior owner who was clearly a little weak on the fundamental concepts. He replaced a perfectly good main on slides with a mast-furling, roller-furling rig, much to the boat's detriment. That's why we got her for dirt cheap :-) If I could expect to be an active sailer for a greater span of years than I really can, and could therefore justify the expense, I would rig TrentePieds with a "silly sail". To do that, however, would entail going back to a proper rig innocent of that god-forsaken main furling gear.

By my lights, IF it were possible to accommodate a square sail on your existing spars, that, it would seem to me, would be the way to go. The impediment would be those forward-reaching tri-pod legs, but maybe you can find a way around that, for squaresails are loose-footed. Given the forward position of the mast you would not be able to hold her even as high as a beam reach , but that, as I understood your first post, wouldn't matter, since apparently your intent is just to have a wind-assist when you are well and truly off the wind.

All the best, whatever you do :-)!

TP

Sorry for the delayed response - boating will do that....

The stiff legged stays in front of the mast do pose a bit of a problem for a square sail, but more importantly, I am really trying to avoid the need for managing any additional hardware, as in booms, tackle, etc. For that reason, I think an asymmetrical drifter in a sock probably presents the best solution for us.

A more intriguing question is whether a mainsail on the extended boom would provide enough power to save a bit of fuel and justify the expense of hassle of managing that sail.

[Delfin]

Originally Posted by jimcarrier

I'm curious whether the existing rudder will be efficient with any downwind sail configuration? This really only becomes a big issue if you lose an engine and need to point.

It's a very big rudder, mounted on a full keel so she should track fairly well. I'm not anticipating doing any pointing, with a beam reach probably as close to the wind as I could achieve. So "home", in an emergency, is wherever I can get to off the wind.

[Apollo366]

I think the gaff rig made of modern materials would do well downwind & look just right too.

You should be able to find a navel architect , or sail-maker that can give good advice.

If you find a Navel Architect he will probably charge for his design, as a sailmaker would too.

Wayne, the old Square Rigger guy!