Masthead Spinnaker

[Runaway#23]

PHRF sailor from the Chesapeake here, and asking for specs to use designing a new masthead spinnaker. Can use one dimension for the hoist from the 7.9 FK, but they have a 10 ft spin pole, and the daggerboard verion uses a 9.5 ft pole. PHRF gets a 6 second penalty for the masthead, just don't want double jeopardy with a pole penalty as well.

All thoughts welcome!

Runaway #23

[dave]

You would do well to carefully read your area PHRF bylaws on rating adjustments as they pertain to sails, it's all in there and online! PHRF doesn't necessarily use the same adjustments [3, 6 seconds, etc] from one area to the next.

The 7.9 is very capable with the standard pole and chute. Learning more about sailing your boat downwind [and up] will help your PHRF AND one design scores more than having a masthead chute and penalty pole AND the lower rating but still sailing as you are now, with all due respect. I'm NOT running you down, I don't even know you!!!! I Just know how sailors are, because I've been doing this for 32 years, make sails and give clinics, write articles, etc. People are always looking for that silver bullet or holy grail to better finishes. NONE EXIST! Hard work, practicing CORRECTLY and attention to detail [including but not limited to a REALLY slick bottom!] are the only means to better finishes.

[fleck]

Runaway,

Gotta agree with Dave that the masthead isn't the holy grail. What are your thoughts? The stock configuration can win at any regatta on the bay. In the conditions where you would want more power, the bigger spin probably wouldn't fly very well. I'm actually planning to build a smaller light air spinnaker for those mid summer drifters. I've also gotten inputs from the masthead boats that the spins are tall and skinny, causing the boats to roll a lot down wind.

If you need any help getting up to speed with the boat, send me an email.

[dave]

Good points Fleck. Even the stock 7.9 chute is fairly tall and narrow as compared to something like a J24. IF [big if] someone was looking for the maximum downwind performance for the $$$$ and the least rating hit, a penalty pole would be the way to go because you just take the hit for the pole. It's ASSUMED that you will use a chute that's designed to that new JC so there's no further hit for the bigger sail, AND that would make a lower aspect ratio sail which should be a more efficient runner. This is how it reads in our area's PHRF bylaws:

2. Spinnaker pole:
a. Any spinnaker pole, which exceeds the J dimension, is subject to a rating adjustment as follows: -3 seconds for up to a 10% increase over J. Increases
GYA-PHRF Bylaws Revised March 12, 2008 14
greater than 10% but equal to or less than one foot, will only be assessed a –3 second change. Increases greater than 10% and greater than 1 foot will be assessed additional seconds on a case by case basis.
b. Boats rated with oversized spinnaker poles will use the JC dimension (spinnaker pole length) for computing the percent of maximum girth for spinnakers rather than J and will not be assessed a spinnaker adjustment unless they exceed the JC dimension by more than 180%

This seems to be a VERY reasonable hit for the advantage gained!

[LarryE-old]

Runaway,

Gotta agree with Dave that the masthead isn't the holy grail. What are your thoughts? The stock configuration can win at any regatta on the bay. In the conditions where you would want more power, the bigger spin probably wouldn't fly very well. I'm actually planning to build a smaller light air spinnaker for those mid summer drifters. I've also gotten inputs from the masthead boats that the spins are tall and skinny, causing the boats to roll a lot down wind.

If you need any help getting up to speed with the boat, send me an email.

I had Gonzelo Diaz, father of Augie Daz, Multi Snipe World Champ and Rolex Yachtman of the year, tell me once that the best thing for real light air was a small light spinaker. Will fly in almost nothing.

[Gerry Connolly]

What about a legal size assymetrical for phrf racing. Anyone have any experience? I would guess they are not "class legal".

Tweek'n & Tug'n
Nova Scotia

[BarryE]

I had Spike make me an asymetrical sail for those days when I was short handed, and racing around the club triangle.
Just about the time I took delivery, my PHRF fleet moved off the triangle course and on to a pure windward Leeward course making the sail significantly redundant.
I still use it for day sails and family picnick cruises, but I've never raced with it. Its easy to use, and fun for short handed reaching off wind, but I can't speak as to its usefullness in racing.

[dave]

A sails rely on a boat's ability to bring the apparent wind forward [light, easily driven hulls] so that the downwind angles/VMG are worth while. At the weight of the 7.9, I doubt that one would pay off. Even the J80 is a slug compared to something like the Melges 24, even though the former carries a 700 square ft A sail. It's also TWICE as heavy and still 1,300 lbs lighter than a 7.9!!!

On the chute size thing. Some VERY good world class sailors are sometimes wrong or not completely right in their views and opinions [aren't we all!] about what does and doesn't make something good, bad, fast or slow. Keel boats have relatively tall masts when compared to day sailors and wind speed increases with height off of the water. While a smaller chute may well fly better in a drifter than a larger one, the main factor probably has more to do with the weight of the fabric and/or sail than the actual size of the sail. Lighter is........................ well, lighter, period! Something very important that's not discussed much is the fact that in really light to light winds you must be beam reaching with the pole on or close to the headstay just to fill [and keep full] the spinnaker. Flatter sails do this better because they have the ability to develope and keep more attached flow over a greater % of sail surface than fuller sails, which stall sooner. This would of course mean that the former would stay full easier and be easier to fly in the light stuff and by sheer time spent in some state of flying as compared to the latter, fuller sail, would be "faster" in said conditions. It's no coincidence that reaching chutes and/or all purpose chutes are cut flatter and smaller in the head/mid sections so that they can reach better.

The other side of the coin are the sheets. It amazes me to see folks using large POLYESTER sheets with SNAP SHACKLES anytime, but especially in light to moderate/light winds!!! Polyester absorbs water and even without the shackles adds a bunch of weight to the clews which causes the sail to collapse. GET RID of the Polyester AND they shackles and buy yourself some decent light air spi sheets and you won't believe the difference it makes, even with a "large" sail or one that is cut more for running.

[Fred Chadsey]

A good answer to the light air sheets is a set of alum. sister clips. they have very little weight and quick to set or unset.

Comment on Asso spinakker for S2 7.9. Ur right the boat is too heavy for an ASso to be effective. I really agree w/ comment on learning to sail the S2 7.9 as built & rated. Once we conquered the use & understanding of board being raised, paralleled w/ use of barberhaulers and short spin poles, There isn't a J24 in the country that can beat us.

Sorry to say! but I just bought a Rocket 22 sporty boat !! I'm 77 yrs. old and looking for more thrills. This boat is DYNOMITE, more fun that big catamarans. 16kts w/ 12kts wind on reaches. How ever I still race the 7.9 in club races.

[dave]

Everyone does stuff differently. Personally, I want NOTHING between the chute and the sheets except a bowline. In my tinhorn days as a racing sailor I sailed with many different folks on many different boats and one thing that repeated itself time and again: Snap shackles AND brummel hooks come open on their own. With that thought in mind I chose many, MANY years ago to forgo anything between the sheet and the chute or anything between the halyard and the chute, period! Bowlines DON'T come undone when under load and they weigh nothing. I take a bozo ball and drill the hole out big enough for the spi halyard then drill some very small holes from two different axies @ 90 degrees to the main holes. This allows me to sew the ball on to the halyard to stop it from going through the exit and out the mast in case someone looses it. It also keeps from having to tie a stop knot for the same purpose, which weakens the halyard. I have NEVER lost a halyard or sheet done this way. With either/or snap shackle/brummel hooks I have been aboard boats who have lost one, the other or both at least a dozen times on the halyard and slightly less on the sheet.

Why do all that it takes and spend all of the MONEY that it takes to campaign a keel boat and crew only to have your race and/or regatta ruined be something so trivial and 100% preventable?

I realize that to some folks snap shackles have that "Gucci" factor. I see them on the vang/boom attachment, the mainsheet/boom attachment, etc, but to me they are good for two things: A nice keyholder and a nice tack shackle. Brummel hooks, no use for me period! JMHO, and no offense intended to anyone.

[dave]

To those of you who choose to continue using such devices on your chute...................................................................... don't believe me if you wish.

Your day will come!

[BarryE]

I've got to agree with Dave, light waterproof sheets tied to the sail is the way to go; long enough to launch and drop the sail through the campanionway.

[Runaway#23]

Gosh, I have to admit that this really sparked alot of discussion! But no one really answered my original questions about sail dimensions or pole length either. Not that I am really serious about changing all that rigging around, adding another halyard, etc but enough banter sufficient to discourage the novice.

So maybe I'll think on it another year and see what Runaway can do with the current setup. After all, there's enough new stuff on the boat now, and quite frankly, I'm getting tired of projects and more inclined to get the bottom wet anyway.

But thanks everyone for all the thoughtful remarks!

[dave]

I answered your question the first time around. You need to read the PHRF bylaws for the area in which you are sailing. They will give you the info that you seek.

If you choose to do otherwise, you will NOT be getting the best info to your questions. Opinions about this or that concerning PHRF and sail/rigging/rating changes are just that, they aren't facts. The facts concerning the alternatives as to different chutes were also given. What more do you want?

[Runaway#23]

Hey Dave;

You are right and since the PHRF rules change from region to region, what is acceptable in one area with one penalty provision may be applied differently in another. I was hoping for some dimensions based on what others may have already done previously.

That really was my question to begin wih, and it was apparent from all the responses, that those who responded had not made / or had opted not to consider this as an option.

It was really nothing more than another winter time "what if" pie-in-the sky abstract and an exercise in nothing more than curiosity. I sailed a 7.9 for four years back in the '90's, moved up to a 37 ft Kirie, sold that a few years ago and got back to this fun little tinker toy.

Can't wait 'til spring!