Видео

I can only assume you here lecturing me because IRL, no one will sail with you.

That's interesting,! I will bounce that off my partner - she is a midwife and I am sure could expand on that a little for me. As a ve4y little one, I of course had no clue about any of it and having left the UK years ago, I wouldn't even know where the records are now to check. Secretly, of course I am just hoping it's all part of my super-hero arc......

@ likely only something your mother would know… more of a curiosity of human development I think of whenever differential eye development comes up.

It's a complex business being an adult. At sea, away from busyness and BS, people seem to revert to whatever they really are behind thier facade, it can be very illuminating. The best and the worst surfaces. I thought I would speak a little more esoterically on this subject because there are enough video lists out there, what's important to learn is the mindset to see the opportunity where others only see a wall. Sailing really instills that in us, that never changes ;)

As I tell my son, we be careful so we can keep playing the game and learning!

@ wise words! After all, the oceans always win...

Glad to be of service! Always keep your head on a swivel out there!

I speak my parents names and include them in conversations everyday. They may have gone ahead, but their love and continuing presence strengthens me always.

No problem 👍

That's a good point... that's basically what this is right !

Depends.. If you were doubtful it was going to hold, but then yes it holds - you are right, a midships preventer is better than no preventer at all. If though, the preventer fails and you thought it was going to hold, then maybe a midships preventer is not better than no preventer at all. If you have no preventer at all you would automatically be mindfully of the boom and would never drive an angle that might cause the sail to back, would always keep your head down and would always stay wary of the mainsheet. Alongside a proper bow rigged preventer, these are the safest methods we have of negating the risk. The only outcme from this decision tree, beyond gear failure and a crew's mistaken actions that lead direcly to serious injury and death is rigging a midships preventer and then acting like it is just as secure as a bow preventer, and then finding out in a hot second that it is not. My only concern is your safety. Hope that helps :)

@@CSMtheMariner Thanks for your reply, I agree with all you said, I would probably have three reefs and not head out in over 20 knots. Used to race J24. and helmed 70 footer past Hatteras into 10 foot seas, without interrupting their wine and chicken party bellow.

I agree I have a slightly different way of doing things based on my experience with much bigger boats than their analysis was focused on. 1. Preloading the dyneema part of the system is 100% necessary and for me with the loads I am dealing with, just a normal part of running any such line doing this kind of work. 2. Our rigging angles, basic system set up etc is the same, 3. My compound adaptation (used by Clipper/ Challenge Business for millions of miles on their boats and originating from Sir RKJ & Sir Chay Blythe) is focused on the granular detail of exactly what happens during the ease down evolution after a powerful main (1000sq ft +) with a preventer on it has gybed, is now backed and needs to be eased off. At that moment the dyneema's stretch characteristics need to be augmented to slow down that main coming down onto my active running back stay. IF that happens my carbon battens can be broken ( 3- 27ft long, Up to $1500 each) by hitting the active backstay too fast , which will also rip the mainsail batten pockets and if you are really luckly the broken part of the batten will get snagged behind the active backstay so it can not then be seperated from the mainsail. Think 5 hrs to drop everything, repair and rehoist + one boat vooucher for every batten you broke. Also, I need to know where in the preventer system the massive over cam stretch moment was focused when easing . Did the entire dyneema deck section take that unfair stretch? (or more particularly that creep ie stretch beyond the material's elastic limit- permanently stretching the line) If it did , that entire line is now compromised to an unknown degree. Do we ignore that. In my method we dont need to. IF we have 40ft of nylon 3 strantd under the boom, we know THAT was where the stetch happened (its easier to stretch than dyneema) so THAT piece is compromised and shuold be cycled out of that role whenever next possible. Cost of new 16mmD2 Marlow dyneema line for me, 120 foot @ $6USD per foot $720. OR replace the 3 strand @ 1" - 50ft mooring line at 1"= $65USD. Hope that helps and thank you for a great question.

@@CSMtheMariner Thankyou, Any time you want to do a piece on post gybe actions, I'll be listening. You gave a nice summary already. All of my "big wind, big sea" gybes were on boats using polyester (because I have been running boats long enough that we did not have Dynema in the old days) and every time the boom came across, despite the preload. Some what related, I have scene an article by Drew Frye about using nylon on the traveler control lines to reduce shock loading on the boom, particularly mid boom systems during controlled gybes. Thanks for your thoughtful work. it seems that for many of my clients with say an HR 39 all dynema may be appropriate. My 40 years at sea has been in the cruising class, so same safety concerns but slightly different parameters. We keep learning.

Very happy to be of service. I think the very best thing here is for you to listen to the book 'The Southseaman'm read by me over on my podcast 'The Mariner's Library'. That's not to tout myself but to point out- square sails have been extensively rigged on marconi and trad rigs on 30-50ft boats many times in the past and the method, whilst not convoluted or complex to someone coming from tall ships MIGHT be very new in operation than modern cruisers (or racers) are used to. In the Southseaman Weston Martyr lays out exactly the hard ware they fabricate for this purpose and how it is operated. To cut you to the chase he thinks it is an absolute pig of a sail and they never use it. BUT he does allude to meeting Willaim Washburn Nutting ( editor of the Rudder magazine at it's height in the 1920's) Bill Nutting had just written 'The Track of the Typhoon' (available as an audio book over on my Patreon page) about his building of the 40f footer 'Typhoon' and her mad dash across the atlanic to race in the solent. In Martyr's book he and Nutting exchagne words on the sqyaresails their vessels rigged and we get more insight into this unusual (even in 1920) configuration. What is interesting is that the difficulties of operating this sail (roll period with another spar aloft, bracing that spar aloft, sending the sail up when the boat is too small to have crew ascend the rigging to unfurl and furl the sail on its yard, the lever arm produced in difficult conditions and it's effect on the yachts downflooding potential etc etc.... I was a tall ship rigger and the oly sail we sent aloft was the raffee and it was ... problematic. However to use this sail you will need to master this task, and you will need to learn about rotten cotton and how to put a sail in stops (dont use modern polyester wool as it pollutes the ocean) ALL of this adds up to one inescapable fact. Square sails on small baots dont work. You can find a few people that will huff and puff and say that ain't so but look around - no one uses them, we evolved away from them becasue we now have better understanding of fluid dynamics and naval architecture and we know this is a poor solution. If you will take my advice, learn about snuffers or furled flying sails and develop the skills to make a spinnaker based solution. Becasue perhaps you ahve had experiences that put you off spinnakers that might seem like a closed door but with good sail management systems and awareness there if no reason to think a chicken chaser (ie small) furled or snuffed kite will cause you much less headaches than trying to reinvent the wheel. I spent a decade on tall ships, I skipper a Big Class yacht (1904) I have nothgin but love for trad sailing concepts BUT our sailing ancestors would storngly question why would attempt to use this sail configuartion when much better, much more approriate ( to the size fo the vessel) sail systems exist now. Even by the 1920's no one was actively trying to make square sails work on yachts .Hope that helps. P.S IF you just love square sails and that's what you want to do- no problem! Listen/ read the Southseaman and all your questions are answered.

Thanks for the insight. I have just started listening to the audiobooks after seeing the video you posted ( I personally like the asides with technical info during the video read.) Thanks again for sharing your knowledge. Justin Ps. On one of your videos you mentioned viewers posting videos so you could discuss their boat and give feedback. I would like to do that even though I’m not real keen on being in front of a camera.

It's a funny thing with preventers and now we have broached the subject it occurs to me that it is remiss of manufacturers to not include the preventer in their std running rigging sets. I dont knwo if it is deliberate to what, save money (seems unlikely) or has just somehow drifted off the manufacturers provided inventory concepts over time. I would love to hear their response actually- although in fairness do you get guys for your spin pole if you buy a new boat that has one? Don't they just provide what conencts to the sail and the sails? Hmmm... Your situation is a little unique with the inmast furling and the altered load centers in places in the boom when reefed and the preventer engages. My sense here is what is the MOST LIKELY mainsail configuration (Ie reef) when the preventer is going to be MOST loaded. Clearly, a white squal with 180 degree wind shift, all standing is the worst case... but my sense is that is unlikley to happen. Equally, whislt the possibility exists to have multiple positioning options on the boom for the outboard connection of the preventer , the reality is you are not going to making those changes when reefing down in heavier airs particualrly when running/reaching. I can imagine easily a system that moves the attachemtn point on the boom, but it feels like we are increasing complication and decreasing usefulness. My experience is that second reef gets hit the hardest across the board. The sail is still reasonably at R2, the 3rd reef seems a bit too serious and requires effort and courage to put in, in fifficutl condiitons so people hold the 2nd reef longest ( I feel) SO. I think work on creating a solution for the preventer connection on the boom that aligns with your mainsail 2nd reef clew position - again with the slider in the boom on in mast furling the strop attacment creates a problem for you but not one that cannot be solved with pad eyes atttached to the boom in that location as per John Harries desgn on his old boat, Morgan's Cloud (check out John's recent blogs about preventers on his site 'Attainable Adventure Cruising' The Boom is strong enough already for normal working loads to be borne by the mainsheet wherever the OEM put it - you will need to be sure the boom can take the forces (consult with a rigger) but it's doable and I think focussing on the 2nd reef as your most likley worst enemy (high loads in th event of crash gybe ) is the prudent way to go. Whatever befalls the boom at R3 will be handled by this set up and we said Full main and R1 are less likely to create problems. At the last gasp of this description I might compromise and say 'between the R1 & R2 point' for the conenction but not at the boom end in your sitation and no closer to the gooseneck than R2. Hoep that helps.

@@CSMtheMariner Yes, that helps! Thank you so much for your detailed answer to my question!

there are some boats (many older boats that run twin control lines to the boom from opposing sides of the boat to create the same stabilizing geometry. this is complex to operate and has been evolved past (except some yawls / ketches on thie mizzens) with first the sliding horse system (a metal bar the mainsheet purchase to attach to that it can in turn slide on, side to side to create a better sheet lead. That evolved into the traveller system much favoured today. AS with so much of our pursuit that has been evolving for 5000 years at least, there are lots fo ideas from sailing's history that can resurface and prove useful in a modern setting, BUT twin boom control lines on the main boom just has too many complicatiosn about it to be a meaningful development of anything in use today. I hope that helps.

Different boats and different deck layouts can benefit from dual mainsheets. They can replace the traveler. Their benefit is primarily sailing up wind, providing excellent sail shape controls. You get more complex, 2 sheets, but loose traveler controls so minus two smaller lines.. They do not address gybe prevention.

You’re very welcome - hope it helps keep you safe !

You have circumvented the entire preventer question like Houdini! Ken would be proud :)

@@CSMtheMariner This is actually what my RYA instructor taught us, but I am not sure how sound that advice is. I feel I am discarding the possibility to stop and stabilize the boat more or less instantly by heaving to. It's probably a question of personal style but it seems that not sailing deep downwind and having a preventer is the way to go.

Glad you enjoyed it! Let me know if you have any questions.

Objectiely incorrect. If I can hold back my 1900sq ft mainsail with the materials choices I am making- there is NO DOUBT that any 40ft boat's mainsail can be held back in almost any situation given comparable materials, good deck hardware and the proper leads. To clarify the situation in an objective manner, imagine yourself in a court where a skipper designed and installed fuse system in a preventer has broken, and someone is seriously injured or dead and you are being cross examined by a maritme professionals. Outline the justification for the choice to install a breakable link in a safety system and describe how the accident is morally acceptable given that the system was designed to break at a load less than that , publically available materials and fittings could have held. I think what would happen is that the skipper would be told that if you are doing the calculation to work out what a good fuse breaking value might be on a 40' boat, why did one not just work out what the likley maximum force is (it's there in tabulated fashion on the Attainable Adventure Cruising Website) and create something that could hold that load. If all parts of your system will hold 10,000kg (1" Nylon three strand will, 16mm Dyneema will, good s/s pad eyes will) then a 40ft boat's preventer can easily be made to NOT break whatever anyone does to it. in court, the fuse looks more like someone was trying to avoid the financial burden of a cheaper preventer system breaking and damaging the boat. That then is not a morally acceptable accident. As a pro - that is how I work out my position on all of these questions- what happens in court IF i am wrong. Hope that helps.

@@CSMtheMariner My point is not to undersize the system. Of course, it should be designed for the maximum expected load (plus a big safety margin). The point is that SOME part of the system will always be the weakest link and I want to know which one that is and make sure that when it breaks we understand the consequences.

I'm glad you found a place to hang for a while. If you ever get the chanc to go sailing (with good people) GO. Sailing opens up 70% of the planet to you, and a whole new world of fun, challenging and self improving situations. Listen to 'The Southseaman' audio book on my podcast 'The Mariner's Library' and tell me what you thought. If you still dont want to go sailing after that, I will hang up my fid. :)

what you see in your minds eye is the rig on my open 60. the boat is 21 foot wide all the way from the beam to the stern, the mast is 100ft deck to truck with a 30ft boom. The first spreader is 22 feet wide (1 foot max beam) and the spreaders are swept back 30 degrees. Composite rigging (not as physically durable as nitronic) It is theoretically possible to use a bow run preventer but the complications of a heavily back-winded main camming the preventer around the composite cap shrouds gives me that 'trap door opening feeling. Instead such boats will use a downhaul beneath the boom that functions as vang and preventor. The strop is Kevlar heavily lashed to the crane end and gooseneck with seperate slings and with enough slack to hang down in a reasonable bow. On this bow is a snatch block or solid saddle that is in turn secured to the side deck via massive backed pad eye. The downhaul strop is rated for 22,000lbs as is the block and deck hardware, because THIS is the only way to complete the side deck preventor (they are still really denagerous in backed main situations) with MASSIVE HARDWARE. Many boats that might face this problem, Comanche, Wild Oats, Volvo 70's Volvo 65's are designed to run with pro crews who are expected for the money they are neing paid NOT to crash gybe unexpectedly and if that is what we are doing today then everyone knows how to stay safe and deal with it. For Open 60 solo , the Godzilla side deck preventer/downhaul/ vang is the compromise some have struck to preserve thier V1's rigging and their wits. For me with the maxi (130ft mast, 40 boom, 21ft beam, 21 ft spreaders, nitroic rigging, 18 degree swept spreaders, I run a 16mm dyneema, bow run preventer with 1 inch three strand nylon under the boom. The system's Max WL is 20,000lbs (-10% extra margin on OEM ) I use this at anything over 30 degre boom angle and consider it as required as a spin pole guy. same with solo and crewed. Racers choose imminent risks for future rewards, that's the mission. Anything else - TRY and get the preventer to the bow. Hope that helps.