Loosefoot main and vang

Tony's reefhook query brings to mind a raft of unsettled questions I had about the loosefooted main and rigid vang. It is obvious that A/C racers and cruisers both benefit from a loosefoot main. The vang is used to control the boom, holding it down and letting it rise, and useful for flattening the sail. Boom out on a broadreach the vang controls rolling, preventing a broach. It does this by hauling the boom down. Vang is used as a jibe preventer but can this be done with the Garhauer used on the Bay Ariels?

I do not understand how a loosefooted main and the rigid vang can work together? Especially with the original boom and fittings.

Does seem that the slug rigged main provides support for the boom in the way it apparently distributes forces evenly along the foot. If you haul the vang down on the boom with the sail attached along the foot you will get results in sail shape. But is this true of the loosefooted rig? Won't the boom bend? What influence is there on the central areas of the sail?

The triangle formed by the rigid vang must consetrate loads on the gooseneck and the boom that were never originally engineered. The main use for the rigid vang, as this inexperienced sailor sees it, is as an expensive topping lift/boom holder.

I'm looking at a loosefoot cruising version of the main for 338: no roach, no battens, very deep reef points, hand sewn rings in the corners. But I'm very concerned about what gear is used to haul the clew out, and control it, since that also is only way to control sail shape. Seems to me it would have to be some strong eight-part set up [on a track] on top of the boom or under the boom?

Is 338's original boom really going to be able to take the stress of a loosefoot main? Does the Garhauer vang bend the boom. What is the best upgrade for the gooseneck and the boomend rigging.

Triton Tim ended up with the modern rig AND it cost him a new boom.

There is that lovely photo of MAIKA'I in the Summer Sailing post of Sept '01 clearing showing her l.f. foot main driving her at 90 kph!! ;)

Ebb,

You have caught some of the concerns I've had all along. In the past it has been suggested that the gooose neck should be the weak link in the system. We designed/copied/dreamt-up a much stronger goose neck here and I can't wait to use it.

I've thought many times that a footed main without a shelf would indeed help distribute all that tension over the length of the boom. But then what happens when you reef the main and all of the load is carried on the reef clew and cringle? The sail ties in the middle of the main should be loose enough that they don't distort the main or carry any presure. So, in a sense, we're back to a loose footed, smaller main. A smaller main with probably just as much presure on it because the damned wind is blowing so hard we had to reef. I will grant you, the clew is farther forward in a reefed main so the upward leverage on the fulcrum, the vang bail, is reduced. How much? I don't know. Maybe enough, maybe not. After all these boats did come with a boom vang. Just not one so shiney.

Another factor in the buckling boom paranoia is all of the holes drilled into the sides of my boom. Surely they must have some sort of compounding effect on the remaining strength of the metal. How much? I don't know. Maybe enough, maybe not. I'm pretty confident though that if the boom snaps it will be the result of something stupid I did while sailing. I've resigned to the fact that I may have to buy or build a new boom one day. I'm okay with that just as long as nobody gets hurt when the original one goes.

As for outhaul equipment. I've thought about track and cars, slugs and slides any thing I see that moves like that I consider an option. But the sailmaker I'm working with said a strop. That's right, I said strop. At first I thought he said strap but his accent made it come out sounding 'oppy'. But I guess it actually is a strop! One with a heavy duty velcro-type attachment. It's strong enough for the America's Cup boats and it's strong enough for me. And it's low-tech which I really appreciate. I asked about UV resistance and wear and it's apparently not as big a problem as I worried about. Just replace the strap(ex that) strop. It will, however, need a pretty decent purchase to move the outhaul under load. Or else one could ease the sheet to tighten the out haul. I'm hoping to send the reefing lines on one side and the out haul blocks and lines down the other. That part we'll have to wait and see. (wait and see if somebody else figures it out before me!)

I think we'll still be using the same sheet end casting for the boom. However, the neck end of the casting will be modified. You know I'll post pictures of the goose neck when it comes back from the shop. As for now I'll just leave you with this one...

Hey Tony.
Hope that an opinionated and experienced sailor drops in here for a chat!

Always equated strop with something you hang on to - as in subway car strop. Envision strop with block off end of boom (rather than a bail or the pair of tangs on 338's boom held on by a loose bolt stuck in the end casting) leading to travelor?

The outhaul tackle on top or bottom of boom would have to, IMHO, be infinitely ajustable and easy to use while sailing. Would have to be mounted to a track or something - with ballbearing cars like the sheet travelor? Maybe the strop the tailor was talking about goes over or around the outhaul on top of the boom to take some of the strain off the outhaul? You know, like a super velcro muff?

This multipart outhaul (or whatever outhaul for the loose foot) must pull the boom into the mast considerably. Flattening the sail with the outhaul while sailing must measured in 100s of pounds. Shouldn't the mast at the boom-end have a sort of saddle-plate? Distributing the point force over a wider area on the mast?

I don't like the 'weakest link' being the gooseneck fitting either!

It is, however. the 'quietest' point for an accident to occur. Wouldn't I prefer a kindof universal joint at the gooseneck?

Gooseneck is a misnomer now, isn't it, as there is no downhaul anymore. Right? Howabout a ball-in-socket joint for the boom to mast fitting? The loads would be fair at almost any boom angle.

But I really hope someone will enlighten us about the forces on the A/C loosefoot boom. And what are the highest recomendations for the end fittings and mast connection? 338's boom is not a very impressive piece of aluminum.

Ebb,

I'm not sure if I'm reading you right or not. The strop is a means of attaching the clew to the boom so it can't fly upwards. The outhaul can then be used to move the clew in or out to help flatten or bag the main belly. Of course this means the aft foot or so of the boom can't have a bunch of accessories on it. I don't envision the clew having to travel forward more than that.

Maybe that's the question. How far do the active sailors out there move their clew, fore and aft, to tweak their mainsails? And then who's busted a boom.

Even though the line would be lead back to the cockpit via the mast, wouldn't the pressure difference be between the tack and clew, independant of the mast? We're really 'stretching' the foot of the main between those two points. That said, I've put a fairly generous mating surface on the 'mast end' of the new goose neck. More so to keep it from pulling out rather than being pushed in and crushing anything.

G'day Tony,
Just you and me so far.
I am confused about the outhaul. The outhaul influences the shape of the sail. The outhaul is under more tension in heavy air and upwind. The ajustment to change the shape will be small (inches) - tweeking and untweeking. Maybe in a nonracing mode little will be required.

OK then, what is the mechanism used at the boomend? Seems to me all the forces are tugging at the end of the boom - loosefooted clew and the sheet. I'm inclined to think that the loads should be spread out here. How is this done and what is the best way.

I guess I'm not sure what the forces are at the gooseneck. Pulling at the sheet with a belly full of wind would put a strain on that fitting, no? In the unlikely event that the boom gets into an unnatural angle with the mast, I'm just asking if there is an optimum fitting that won't be as vulnerable as one 338 has.

When I look at the boom and imagine this as a strut in the loosfooted main setup, I can't see what influence the vang can have without bending the extruded boom. It is rather meager sectioned. If you curve the boom by hauling it down with the vang, areen't you increasing the chord in the sail? Buckling the boom is definitely something to consider here!!

I'm concerned about what is the strongest and most elegant way to upgrade what I have, if possible. I'm convinced loose foot IS the way to go.


[I get into esoterica I know, but as long as we're on the subject of the main: I'm going with a tilted up boom of the same original length so I can get some headroom in the cockpit aft of the dodger. Not going to change the goosneck position.

Also, regarding a straight leech on a cruising sail, I may be far off base.
Raising the outboard end of the sail will decrease the area. I have just read and been influenced by Steve Dashew's comparison of a triangular sail with a roached sail. He points out that "the effective aspect ratio of the roached sail will be much hgher..." and "the roached main has a much better tip shape and less tip loss which is a major contributor to induced drag." Roaching 338's will add area back. Ohoh, there's that pesky backstay!

I know we are not talking about sail shape especially from the cruiser's view.
It is interesting tho that cruisers now have huge roached sails because of high aspect ratio mains, sometimes requiring full battens up top and shorter ones controlling the leach. Dashew says the real driver on a cruise rigged boat is the mainsail, rather than the genoa or geneker. Have to talk with Hogin about this. I didn't want ANY pockets because, as I read, most repairs to the sail are in these places.]

Most people never adjust the outhaul. Trying to adjust the outhaul while underway from the end of the boom is awkward, to say the least.

I suppose with a loose footed main it becomes important.

Here's what Tim Lackey did:

http://www.triton381.com/sailing/equ...ghardware2.htm

I never really thought about breaking the boom itself. Weren't these extrusions used as masts on smaller Pearsons?

Anything can happen, of course.

Most of the racing fleet on SF Bay have some form of outhaul control. The outhaul on Maika'i is similar to Tim Lackey’s (see last photo on his page), except that the outhaul line on Maika'i goes into the boom and exits at the mast. From there, it travels back to the clutches on the cabin top. A cabin top winch is used to tighten the outhaul when under sail. This type of outhaul setup allows you to make very fine adjustments in sail trim with ease from the cockpit.

Bill,

Do you still have the original boom on Maika'i? I've downloaded all of the pics of her off the forum but there isn't one that shows that much detail. Are you going to make me say it? WE DEMAND PICTURES!!! Now that you've mentioned your set-up it can't be considered classified information anymore. :D

Senior Ebb, don't do it! That's what the topping lift is for! You need that sail area! Just thought i'd chime in here....
And my outhaul doesn't get used much either, but i'm not loose footed. Mine runs inside from the aft end to forward near gooseneck, then exits to a jam cleat.

My question now is how is the gooseneck end supposed to be held down? Mine kinda free floats in that area, with a little tit thingy sitcking out below it on the track. Maybe i can get some pictures next time i get to the boat. I have a piece of line ran down to an eye at the base of the mast for now. Must be a more technical method....

can you stain epoxy? I had a big hole in a coaming that i filled, but it's pretty light. Just wondering how to make it blend in a little better before i get going with the epifanie's....


Also got my new working jib today from Sail Exchange. It's a Doyle... looks great...haven't tried it out yet. $295. I think he has a couple more.

My .02 for today...

Howdy Bill,
Wha a a l, I do know that 'U' fittin down there is original, for the downhaul. It's there in the Plans.

But does anybody rig a tackle there? You were supposed to tweek the luff with it, but the bitty gooseneck did not have much tweekability. One inch??

Bill(willie) don't do what eggzackly....? Rig a Garhauer hard vang on the boom?

.................................................. ......

You can mix universal colors with epoxy. Available from a real paint store. Probably just one 'brown' - burnt sienna, something. A Little goes a long way. Drops, 1/4 tsps. Experiment away. Probably can get a translucent effect, like UV inhibiter. Expect exposed epoxy to yellow down the line. If you mix little blobs, do it on acrylic sheet. Small amounts of twopart are best mixed with a putty knife on a dedicated 1/4" flat sheet - must have had my two X two piece for a decade. Wipe it off with denatured. Hold mixes up to the light!! My goodness, loads of fun!

Maybe start with a known quantity of part A. Play with the color until it passes muster, then add the hardener.


.................................................. .........

Tony,
hows about a picture of yer hero gooseneck "strongest link"
Could I ask, why the inner end casting in your picture has such a huge hole. Is that wear? Be so nice to see the hardwear lined up like those exploded drawings.

Tony, yes it's the original boom. Next time I'm at the marina I'll try to get a few photos that show the setup. For an approximate idea, take a look at posts 6, 7, 8, 21, 24, 26 and 27 in the Ariel Restoration thread in the Photo Gallery forum. Last post was July, so you will need to extend the search to a year to find the thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by commanderpete

I never really thought about breaking the boom itself. Weren't these extrusions used as masts on smaller Pearsons?

Anything can happen, of course.

---

Tim has a new boom for the upcoming season—many reasons, but one is that his Garhauer vang was seriously bending his boom with the loose foot.

If you have a loose footed main, btw, I definitely recommend leading the outhaul aft to the cockpit like Tim did. I have a similar arrangement on my boat and find that once you have the ability to adjust it, you will, and to the benefit of your sail shape.

Sorry, no pics of the new goose neck yet. Just the one in my head. The one with Bora Bora just over my shoulder. The waves crashing out from the bow as she drives to windward. My agile, bronze body working the sheets and tiller to bring us in. In. Where the islanders, lovely and scantilly clothed beckon me...yeah right :p . Any way the big hole is where the arrow-head shaped, spring loaded toggle use to reside. Just above it used to be the ears that held the tack pin and one of the many reef hooks that came with this beast.

Do the Ariel/Commanders share the same extrusion with the Tritons? I know Tim wrote that he had watched his boom bend. I just figured that the Tritons weigh more and have more sail area leading to more stress. Besides, if the Bay area boats go out in all of that wind and no one has mentioned snapping a boom I'm probably safe with these upgrades or changes.

Here's a pic shortly before it exploded across the table :D

Getting back to the strop. Here is a pic that the sail maker forwarded to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tony G

Do the Ariel/Commanders share the same extrusion with the Tritons? I know Tim wrote that he had watched his boom bend. I just figured that the Tritons weigh more and have more sail area leading to more stress.

---

I don't know about that. If the boom pictured in the shot with the strop is a standard Ariel/Commander boom, then no, they aren't the same extrusion.

As far as breaking his boom... no, I don't think it would break. But it wasn't transfering the shaping force of the vang very efficiently to the sail either!

Sure looks like these boomend fittings are due for replacement. Who was it here that was going to look into this?

From my perspective (searching for the ultimate Ariel boom, if that IS what I'm doing) certainly the family here has opened a Pandora's Boom of problems. Real and Imaginary. I am just plain inexperienced with aluminum spars. Need this discussion to help sort it out. Our old spars seem to be beefier tho than that photo of sheet metal (a Catalina boom?) Tony's sailmaker sent him to illustrate the strop set up.

That group of (4?) outhaul and reefing sheaves on that Catalina boom looks like just the ticket to reduce gear, BUT I don't think that much could be put into the end of the A/C boom. Never say never, if something like that exists in an aluminum casting, it'ld be easy enuf to shape to fit an Ariel boom. Wouldn't it? But, of course, that fitting is all stainless.

I'm suspicious of old aluminum castings. There are plenty examples of substantial wear, pitting and crystalizing around. Maybe it is time to design, or have designed, new modern fittings. It can't be any more difficult to have aluminum castings made than bronze. Naturally, I want my new set done with Almag 5, which will never corrode. I just recall that the idea was to have new fittings machined from billets. Anybody want to bite the billet on this?


And while fantasizing here about this loosefoot boom (it isn't brunettes any

more) why not reverse the boom, putting the groove on the bottom side and

weld in a truss. The stiffner would be widest at

the vang attachment and toward the middle, graduating to zero at the

ends. The vang could attach to the new flange. Not much weight, and a

lot less bendy. Any thoughts?? :confused:

Now that's down right scary, Ebb. I've thought the same thing about flipping the boom (not only the flippin boom). I'm not so sure you'd have to add a truss because the bolt rope channel would add alot of resistance to the (then) upward flexion.

Yes a piece milled down from billet stock is a better choice than cast. But look at how well these 'old tech.' castings have held up so far. I'm all ears/eyes for a repacement boom end that has sheaves for the outhaul and a tang(?) for the main sheet AND slips right into our extrusion. Yah-right.

I can get access to a CNC but I don't even know how to turn it on. What we need is someone that can write the 'plans' for the piece we want in format that I can bring to my buddy. He'll know what to do with the rest. We need that and time. This guy makes the machines that build machines and he's pretty busy. Meanwhile I'll keep surfing for the slide-in upgrade that may exist somewhere on the web. Tony G

Interested in new generation end fittings. Repeat for emphasis.

It is still a bendy boom groove up or groove down. The only way to stiffen the boom is to add something to the girth. IE the middle. You have to make a sort of bridge girder, if you will. We have seen modern (ugly ) booms with fatter mid sections.....what helps to keep them from bending.

But, not being an engineer, why couldn't a long triangle of gusset material be added in the groove on TOP? Opposing the bending pull of the vang. And not have to redesign the end stuff an upside down boom would require! In fact THAT is the answer to the bending problem and keeping the old boom! The material would be 1/4" plate that likely would not have to go clear to the ends. Maybe like two thirds or even less of the boom length.

.........Just took a look at the boom.
How much of a gusset would it take to really stiffen the boom? It'ld be a long narrow triangle with an apex of 3" at the vang? Would that be enough?

How long would it need to be? A plate with a section like a sail slug could be slid down the groove if the front fitting was taken off. It would have to be machined very well to be able to fit snug in the groove and still move into position. A couple machine screws would hold it in place. 1/4" plate with a square or round welded on a long side and machined. If it fit well, it would keep the boom straight, and be removable. Might work! Wonder if there is some fantastic plastic material?

Might then be able to get the bottom of the sail to respond to the vang.

As I recall, not only did Zoltan managed to make it to Greece with his original (40 year old) boom, but the boat has been bought and sold a couple of times since still with the original spars. To me, that argues for using similar cross sections and hardware when making replacements.

Lickety Split, for example, had a replacement boom that would probably meet Ebb's requirements for stiffness. Rectangular in shape, it looked like a bridge structural member. :rolleyes: Very, very stiff. It was originally from a 1970's high tech yacht design that has since disappeared from the sailing scene. Ask Joe Antos about it. He finally removed the boom and replaced it with something closer to original. (see member profile for address)

In my experience, the gooseneck gives/breaks first. This disaster involved my loose footed mainsail, the sliding tracked gooseneck with a downhaul and a preventer claw on the boom positioned perhaps five feet aft of the gooseneck. The claw I am talking about is the old yellow moveable horseshoe-like device with the two plastic pads that contact the upper side of the boom.

When we went into a flying jibe in heavy weather a couple years ago, fortunately the gooseneck gave way, not the boom.

As for the downhaul, I use a 2:1 purchase, the line being tied to the block on the cabin top, going up through a block at the bottom of the gooseneck, back through the block on the cabin top and up to a cleat on the mast.

As for the outhaul, I have a 6:1 purchase (loose footed mainsail). There is a slider in the mast track that holds the clew down to the boom. The outhaul only pulls the clew out. The line from the outhaul runs around a cheekblock on the boom, into the boom interior and continues forward to come out at the forward end of the boom where there is a cleat. (all my lines, halyards, reefing, etc. are at the mast and forward end of the boom - centrally located.)

The problem with the 6:1 is that there is not enough room between the boom end and the outhaul so that the lines and blocks rub against one another and won't release or pull readily, even when there is no wind. They bind. I am thinking of either getting a smaller line (I think now it is 1/4 inch) and/or going to a 3:1 or 4:1 outhaul so it releases easier.

I have had no trouble with or evidence of the boom bending, but I have been very cognizant of that possibility so it isn't like it would have gone unnoticed.

I would have some concern, however, about moving the main sheet connection forward from the end of the boom.

Doh! There's another one of those 'inside' guys! I'm turning green with envy for that clean boom look. Maybe I'm complicating things in my mind too much. I've just gotta cut a couple of holes in the boom and call it good.

Or else...if we are indeed running with the Pearson D section spar for our boom, as alluded to in another thread here, then we have a nearly identical extrusion to the Dwyer DM-375. In which case one daring Ariel/Commander owner could try ordering, say, the DH 6100 Internal System Outhaul end piece and, maybe, the DH 3100-1 Internal System Gooseneck and use them on, whataya say, a 'stroppy' loose footed main sail. Of course the main sheet tang (is that what it's called) would probably have to be changed to a 'bail' type attachment. Being that far aft on the boom it could easily be secured through the extrusion wall, through the mounting flanges of the DH 6100 and backed with a compression tube. Just off the top of my head this is.

http://www.dwyermast.com/items.asp?c...=DM%2D375+Boom

With my hopfully sometime soon before X-mas goose neck I'd have to throw about half of the DH 3100-1 away.
I'd have to be dared.
Maybe even...double dog dared. :cool:

Just found te same thing at Rig-Rite
http://www.rigrite.com/Spars/Kenyon_...html#D-Section Internal Outhaul Assembly and Parts

Thanks to all for the vang input,
I'm at this moment getting the required templates together, etc. for the Garhauer order. Including a request that the control line goes to the cockpit.

My original soft vang attached to a bail on the boom about 39" out from the pin on the goosneck.

Would somebody know if this is the correct measure for a rigid vang. Same place? Correct in the sense that you haven't had any problems with it. How does one know where to put a vang in the first place? Is there a formula?


Maybe Garhauer has kept records, I'll ask, and a TUSEN TAKK for the measure!



Good name for an Ariel, eh??? :D

My opinion to the location of the aft (upper) end of vang is determined by the height of the forward (lower) end. If I had to do mine over I would have raised the mast mounting one inch which would move the upper mounting aft. This would give a bit more clearances over the cabin top...ed

Thanks Ed,
Taking a look at Bill's installation on the thread 'Rigid Vang', looks like the flange of the vang is maybe 1 1/2" off the bottom of the mast. Seem right to you? While not clear, the parts do seem barely to clear the front of the dog house.

My guess is that the bigger the angles you can get - ie the corners of boom, vang and mast - the more efficient the vang will be. Within reason - too short on the boom would actually make it harder to haul the boom around.
Too long on the boom would pull the boom more into the gooseneck. Has to be a right place on the boom. Just wondered how that was arrived at. And who arrived at it.

Also the further out on the boom the vang is attached the more bending force would be put on the boom. So obviously there is a 'neutral' point of attachment that equally divides the pull in and down. I got here because of Triton Tim's bending boom problem that caused him to go with a stiffer one. I believe.

Thusly, who decided the soft vang bail position on 338. 39" out from the pin. Class rules & racing regs? Or is it entirely left up to the vicissitudes of the individual skipper.

Bill doesn't bend his boom and neither do you, so it has to be in exactly the right place! :D

I'm certainly aware that since I do not own a rigid vang yet that I'm out of the zone. When Bill was describing his vang install awhile ago I just accepted the laurel and hardy without question.

Why did the boom have to be raised to the prescribed 40 degrees? That broke the goosneck. I still don't know why the boom has to raise to such an extreme angle unless it has something to do with the reach of the vang. I thought it had something to do with attaching the plate to the boom.

But 40 Degrees is in the realm of efficient vang installation angles. What little I can find out from the outside here is that 45 degrees is the optimum angle. But because the boom is often designed low to a deck or coachroof that angle has to be stretched. Vangs are installed with effective angles of 30 degrees (US Sails).

Found out that rigid vangs are also rigged to curved travelors. Too confusing!

To my knowledge I was the first to install a rigid vang on an Ariel in the area. As a result I was not sure how it was going to work and what the installation was going to look like. What I did was mount it temporarily using large hose clamp bands. After securing it to the mast I attached it to the boom where I thought it had a good purchase. Tuned out it was to long of a throw and when I eased the topping lift off the boom ended up in the cockpit. Not what I was hoping for. By raising the boom up to the forty degrees and then mounting it this allowed enough load on the internal spring to support the weight of the boom and the sail. Just enough load to keep it up so the main is not stretched and supporting the weight. Nice for very light air sailing, it helps bag the sail a little.

The very first time we used the vang in a heavy weather condition was in a race on the city front. This was before I had secured a fixed goose neck. Turns out that we found the weakest link in our installation. As a result of not paying attention to the amount of tension we had pulled on to the vang we forced the goose neck to pull from the mast. Not sure if it was vang load or very old goose neck. Either way it was not that big of a deal. we were still able to sail on all points of sail and in fact brought her all the way home with the boomed attached to the mast with a sail tie.

I think the bail location is the call of the person doing the rigging. ......ed

That's great Ed.
Believe it or not, I didn't know a spring (under compression?) was involved! This Garhauer vang sounds like an incredibly engineered machine for the money!

Of course I have to ask if the spring has weakened since new and dropped the boom any? Suppose the vang is in the maintenance log and has to be sprayed with T-9 at the beginning of the season? Does one unhook the vang and let it rest? Don't think I'm kidding here? Is a topping lift still permanently rigged as a safety?

Wild that it pulled the gooseneck out. Will pay serious attention to that fitting. Haven't time now to look it up, but did you end up with something stronger on the mast? I'm assuming the boom fitting has to be replaced with aluminum, one way or the other. The boom end is attached to 18" of flat track on the mast with all aluminum pieces - the slide permanently made immovable by machine screws on top and bottom.

The pin is captured by a 'U' of 3/32" aluminum flanges on the slide. It looks like it is all one very nice intricate cast fitting, but holy catfish if one needed a 'weakest link' this is IT!

The 'ears' that hold the pin are bent outward from the pin. Past altercations, maybe?

You have these s.s plates attaching the vang to the boom and the foot of the mast. Doesn't there HAVE to be something equally strong at the third point - boom to mast? It is daunting because that group of cast aluminum pieces are well engineered really good looking bits. It's a kind of universal joint made of a comparatively weak metal. I don't know where to begin strengthening all of this. Looks like knee surgery. :(

Don't know if I can imagine forty years of boom connected to mast, but these parts show very little wear - no elongations in the holes, strain in the track and slide, the hole in the boom end fitting looks unused. While the end fitting is rough and oxided it looks pretty good. Wonder if I have to worry about it - will it break in Tonga Tonga?

Hey Ebb, have you reviewed my intallation story?

http://www.pearsonariel.org/discussi...ight=Boom+Vang

Seems to me I have had the rigid vang going on five years now. I no longer have a topping lift. So far the spring does not show any sag. You can order a new one if needed. It is a simple job to replace if needed. I suppose if you moored with the boom just sitting on the vang you would expect to see some fatigue sooner. We hang our boom on a pendant attached from the back stay while at the dock.

After pulling the boom from the mast I removed the track the goose neck slid on and made a permanent attachment. Used to old goose neck fitting by just adding some ss ears with three holes on each side and tapped the mast and bolted her down. I suppose this is still the weak link but I think I prefer that. With a little care and thought it has held up very well. If something is/will pop I wanted it to be something that I can take care of and still maintain control of my boat. A busted boom can be dealt with but it is a little harder to keep a sail working and not tear it up with jagged edges.

I would offer that it would not be all that bad to be busted in Tonga Tonga :D , it is sitting in Berkeley that would be a *****.....ed

Busted in Berkeley would be a *****!
Got the picture, Ed!

Bill, your Rigid VBang is my point of reference here.
To which, where, and how I have alluded.
But only when I git me own will I be included
in understanding the installation of the Gauhauer there.

Two guys from my marina recently got hauled for maintenance and bottom then left, singlehanded, for Baha. One sailed without an autopilot and his windvane disintergrated. The other skipper also made it to San Diego, but the story is the boom broke his jaw and knocked a number of teeth out.

[Yeah, right, Zoltan make it all the way to the Med without raising his boom, kept his teeth, AND got the girl.]

Senior ebb is more convinced than ever that raising the boom to get standing headroom in the cockpit is required. Hell, it'll be the Only place I'll be able to stand upright! The boom stays the same length, but I loose about 12 squares off the driver. The hard vang does so many good things that, at the moment, I can see going nowhere without it - even tho that's important on deck stowage space right behind the mast.

My vang is going to have to hold the boom up at a head clearing angle. The angles are different, the length of the now standard Ariel vang a bit longer. Therefor these queries - whose answers I will intelligently apply to 338's special and still unknown situation. Yes indeedy. But I'm up the creek and rilly depend on you gents telling me what's what and what for. Inordinately appreciative - er,
Thanks!


(make note to self. Order extra vang spring and hard hat.)

Ebb,

Here it is. Fresh out of the box and in need of some grinding, filing and polishing. What else is there to do here all winter long?

Hey Tony, you forgot the weakest link!

Boy do I feel stupid! Thanks for pointing that out Ebb. This is how it was supposed to be assembled as per the drawings.

still don't see no stinkun weakest link :D

I am a part time.....make that a sometime, racer so I look for correction on this from the experienced ones. My view of the the traveler and mainsheet are that main angle (to the wind) is controlled not with the sheet but with the traveler, when you are sailing to windward. Sail tension/flatness are set with the mainsheet. Except in light winds where you want some fullness in the main, or in really hard winds where you want to flatten the main beyond what you can do with a cunningham or the downhaul I have, you want almost no vang tension or lift. Only after the sheeting angle puts the boom outside of the traveler, do things change. At that point, sheeting angle is set with the main sheet, and sail set/tension is set with the vang.

I have a standard main, so the following is conjecture. The only real loss with a loose footed main is the ability to add tension under high wind conditions when sailing off the wind. This makes your outhaul and downhaul/controls all the more important. In light winds, you still can support the weight of the boom to keep fullness in the sail, and I believe that the use of traveler, sheet, and vang remain the same. Also if you try to flatten a loose footed main with the vang, as has been stated, it really puts a lot of force on the gooseneck and the boom itself. So that's my story

Happy Thanksgiving to all.

I'll add my two cents for whatever it they are worth. When I had my loose footed main built, I was told by the sailmaker - Quantum Sails in Texas - that the benefit of a loose footed sail is that it spills wind at the foot, and the foot keeps its wing shape at the foot. A loose footed sail therefore is faster. The non-loose footed sails were developed because of racing rules, I was told, which required that the foot be attached to the boom throughout its length. Those rules have now been changed. - That is why everyone today is going loose-footed (allegedly 95% according to the sailmaker).

In the non-loosefooted sails (which I used to have), the sails could not have a wing shape at the boom but had to be "tucked in" to conform with the straight line of the boom. In other words, the wing shape had to be terminated above the foot in favor of a straight line. That meant the shape of the sail was lost approaching the foot. Pulling the foot tight with a vang in such a case would wreck the sail shape further up the sail, in addition to bending the boom. The outhaul and downhaul/cunningham and the sheet/traveler are the only running rigging adjustments to the foot and luff.

The vang/preventer should not used for sail shape, other than in a down wind run to keep the boom/outhaul from lifting when the sheet/traveler can be of no help, and decreasing the effective sail area. And to help prevent a flying jibe.

MORE
M O R E
M O R E !

As for me, I only offered two cents worth as I mentioned. The next bit of wisdom, or lack thereof, goes up exponentially. I can afford a two cent investment, but I don't have $500 cash investment (the next increment for an additional pearl of wisdom) on the table at this moment.

Hope you had a good Thanksgiving dreaming of the blue waters, the warm days, and the fresh winds.

Ok...I don't know if this is worth $500 but here goes.


The shape issue has been solved with out being loose (if you will excuse the expression)...Here is an example on something just slightly larger than our beloved A/C's.

http://www.offshorespars.com/websitenews_aug04.pdf

The Park Ave Boom terminates the foil fairly well. There have also been sails built with a zipper foot, allowing the draft to be carried way down towards in the sail. There are also terminated foil sections on keels with these keel plates/wings. So that solution has also been examined.

If you have draft stripes or ribbons on your main, then you use either the sheet on the wind or the vang off the wind to adjust sail twist just to the point when the flow almost stalls. Generally this will align your top batten with the boom. I don't see how you have this control off the wind with a loose footed main. But I have no experience with a loose footed main.

John,
At the bottom of the page of giants there is a Hoek 75 ketch. Maybe there is enough suggestion of a shadow in the main to think the sail maker built in chord shape down to the boom. You can almost see the shape of a shadow just above the boom as you scroll up past the 125 footer. They are dramatically photgraphed on a flatout reach with the sails in as hard and tight as the wings on a jet. These sails seem to have full chord clear to the boom without flattening and without a filler piece on the bottom of the sail. Can't see, have to assume that.

You are pointing out, aren't you, that sail shape clear to the boom can be acheived by the sail maker. For this point of sail anyhow. Of course with the boom out and the sail more full you would loose it where the sail flattens to the boom. I have no idea. On these points of sail does the foil matter as much as when beating to windward?

It seems to me you are therefor saying a rigid vang is more useful to a slug footed main in arranging the shape you want in windy conditions or in a larger variety of conditions? Your first salvo is beyond my tech condition. I have sailed but I'm sadly not an experienced sailor, but I do want the remodeled rig planned for 338 to teach me the good things. In other words, traditional sail control, boom and line control, safety are prime concerns. Need to make correct decisions in fog of ignorance.

Just from the amatuer standpoint now, the sail connected to the boom along the foot provides support for the boom and advantages in dialing in the best sail shape for the conditions and point of sail. I've just read that 95% of all mains built now are loose foot.
(I'm romantically inclined to them also as I had a gaff rigged cutter with a loose foot main that was cut with an obvious chord below the boom. Why not? A roach on the loose foot of the main.)
Designers create fashion. Is that what we have here? Is the loosefoot main a 'what goes around comes around' kind of thing? Big time racers have kept the boom attached across the foot. They are into big time control.

I wondering if the attached foot (with the Garhauer) is the way to go for a cruising 338? All unreasonable opinions from seasoned skippers greatly admired. :confused:

This is a one dollar addition. There are ways to SORT OF get around this problem, like the zipper foot. When you have a much larger boom, or a boom where there are other large forces, the sail may be necessary for structural reasons.

One of the reasons for the loose footed main is to spill the wind under the sail. You don't want backpressure at the foot for ultimate performance, and spilling the wind underneath, as I understand the theory, is one way of doing that. A zipper sail does not do that.

But there is a reason for a sail being in a slot or track, particularly for much larger vessels. With a loose footed main, there is a tremendous compressive force on the boom, without any support to keep the boom from bending. With a much larger boat, this compressive force could be very significant, particularly if there are mid-boom mounted bending elements. (I was originally concerned about this with the Ariel, but have not encountered noticeable problems). The boom is in unsupported compression between the outhaul and the gooseneck. If the boom remains straight, then there is no problem. It can withstand the compression. But if something, such as a vang or a mid boom mounted traveler, puts a modest bend in the boom, that compression, once the bowing of the boom has started, will bow the boom further. There is no sail to put a limit on an ever increasing bowing of the boom until ....... Stay tuned for what happens when a boom exceeds its structural bending limit but hints would include the words "buckle", "replace" "serious problem" and "Oh _ _ _ _ !"

Ebb,

Exactly....This is not from direct experience but talking to racers (somewhat casually) and from what I read. The sailmakers now have the capability to build a sail with the foil that they or the owner wants. The really high end racing sails are molded laminate structures. Once they are mounted, the job is to keep them adjusted so that the air flow over the foil is maintained. Shape has already been built in. Part of the job is to set the controls so the built in shape is present, and in many caes you can mark controls to maintain the set. An all out racing boat has controls and tweaks way beyond what what we have on our boats. They say on any point of sail, short of dead down wind, the sheet tenders job is to find and maintain that angle to the wind (apparent nt true) that does the job. They also have instrumentation on the sail and mast to tell them where they are. And they are watching the speed increases or decreases, not absolute speed.

I am not for or against loose footed mains. If fact, the other foil is generally loose footed (the jib). Sail twist in the jib is generally maintained by vertical sheeting angle. That is why we have those long runs of jenny track on our decks. But think of the forces we apply to the clew of the jib to shape it.
The same forces are now needed to shape the main if it is loose footed. So instead of a vang ( and you will still need one to prevent boom lift off the wind) you will need an adjustable car and very good/strong outhaul control to do the shaping for you.

I can be convinced that a loose footed main can carry shape lower in the sail than modifications to the boom or strange shelf construction in the sail itself. The price is added complexity in sail control. I don't believe that having a loose footed main changes the way to think about sail controls as I described in my first submission. And that is, that sheet on the wind, and the vang or clew control off the wind, control shape. On the wind sail position is a function of the traveler and off the wind it is a function of the sheet. So you put the boom where you want it and then dial in sail shape. Not that there is not interaction between the controls, but we are driving a boat, not a train.

BTW, I couln't find a picture, but the first Park Ave Boom on the J Boat Enterprise, was about 4 ft wide. The main was set on a series of tracks perpendicular to the boom. Think about adjusting those.

Talk about cross posting....It's a shame we can't see each other Theis, with a mug of coffee, comtemplating all this on a nice clear day with great boat underneath us.

Wallace Ross,the author of Sail Power, and Doyle the sailmaker both advocate for the vang as a shape controller. I do wholeheartedly agree with your point that loose footed mains may require re-engineering of the boom section and gooseneck, for all the reasons you stated so well.

The mid-boom traveler, was an accomodation to people who were tired of tripping over the traveler. And it also has made it less effective. Most of the controls we have been discussing are best applied at the clew.

Hope you had a great Thanksgiving. At least here in Massachusetts we had a one day repreive but it is again 35 deg out side.

I would like to offer just a couple of thoughts to the whole picture. I guess my first thought is somewhat directed to capn.ebb. Are the questions you raise about a the need for a vang or are your comments more to the point of a rigid vang. My opinion is a boat rigged with a vang is able to adjust to different conditions a little easier. Does not matter if it is rigid or soft. Just one more tool at your disposal.

In terms of performance sailing, if this is your game, my opinion is the more you learn about sail trim the better your results will be. With that said I think the vang methods described by others is what most of us would admit to. If you spend a lot of time on many different racing yachts you will find a host of ways to trim sails and maybe expand your methods.

I would like to throw in one more concept that the vang can be used for. The term is vang sheeting. Rather than go in to great detail on what this means I would just offer an article....
http://www.boomvang.net/vang.htm

If you do a google search you will find a number of different writers who have covered this subject.

On Pathfinder we have been vang sheeting for years. For the local sailors in SF Bay this method is almost a must in our ebb current chop. Vang sheeting allows you to maintain main sail power while saying high on the wind and in the favorable current while you are racing.

No preaching here just an observation. And in terms of loose foot or attached we sail a loose foot. But I guess that is somewhat like saying I like GM cars over Fords........ed

Ed,

Interesting comments. We all need to understand the controls we have to make the boat do what we want, and vang sheeting is one of those controls. With the wind you normally have, you tend to learn quicker, I think. And we never are going to be able to move the mast around like they do on the One Designs or even boats like the J's But here is an interesting note I found on the West Coast J29 site:

NOTE: It is recommended that you "sleeve" the long J/29 boom internally 3’ aft and 2’ forward of the vang bale as this will help prevent bending or possible breakage.

I do think we have a longer boom than is generally called for today, and so heavy vang use can call some modification.

As far as loose footed mains, you pays your money and takes your choice. I found another comment from a sailmaker that makes sense. And that is that loose footed mains are the product of better sail materials, and these materials don't need the support at the foot that older materials did, to maintain shape in the sail. He also pointed out that the outhaul becomes a more important tool for all the reasons cited earlier.

This has been great and I hope to see some more comments from others. It has gotten me to think, for sure.

For those that are still not convinced about the loose footed main, I have been holding back with the ultimate clincher.

When the temperature has taken a tumble, and a driving rain is lashing at the sail, all the water comes roaring down that non-loose-footed sail (what is that called?) runs about half way back along the boom and dumps on the poor soul seated on the lee side of the cockpit. If that person happens to be a guest or crew, who cares. You can just let the person know that the bath is part of the thrills, the excitement, the love of sailing. But if you are seated there and get doused, or one of Commander Pete's friends is seated there, and decided not to go out on the boat again, what could have been an enjoyable romp in rough weather becomes a crisis.

On the other hand, with a loose footed main the water never gathers on the boom, but is blown away in fine droplets under the sail before the water reaches aft to the cockpit the cockpit. It is much therefore much less likely that your can of good German beer will be severely diluted with rain water.

Now that has to be worth something!

Theis,
I hope some day we get to share one of those German beers on the water. I really do appreciate your approach to sailing. Also, I again must say, that you are sounding more and more like a hard core racer. ;) ......ed

Theis,

Your logic is irrefutable. I would argue for a bottle of Sam Adams, but that would be too picky...

They finally arived and I have found the new weakest link. I was surprised. The pieces are much lighter than the originals. Hopefully that's due to advanced engineering and not just being cheap crap!

The Dwyer extrusion is not exactly the same as ours so naturally some 'modifications' will be needed. After holding the pieces in my hands I really wanted to beef them up a bit anyway.

Theis' final arguement for the loosefoot cannot be refuted. Wasn't myself going to. I havn't read ANY cruiser's comment to this effect! Maybe they is all huddled under their rigid dodgers when it rains. I believe Frenchmen use their sails to collect potable water.

Tony, I've got to order that stuff for the boom. Have you got some numbers? You know, and I can't be the only one, really go for a photo or three of your boom with the new fittings. Process of being fitted, too.

Aluminum can seem very unsubstantial. Have to conclude, looking at the dinky original moving pieces and castings that they did pretty good over the decades. I'm impressed how nicely sculpted they are. The key word/phrase to me is Almag, the alloy of our extrusions - and I would hope the same used for the new fittings you have there. Thinking about corrosion. I have read of recent alloys: Almag 4.5 and Almag 5 - impervious to salt water corrosion. Probably only military can afford it.

And, how did you come to the substantial new gooseneck? Your own design? Would like to see it all connected up!!!
THANKS

I think these most recent comments show that it is time to start on a new thread under the "technical" section, one that has not been covered in ANY detail before. The new thread should be broken up into three categories. The first, perhaps is racing, the second for cruising, and the third for parties in port. But certainly this new thread is appropriate and a near mandatory part of the sailing religion.

The new thread should relate to BEER. Which beers are best for which category? For example, the best beer for the port parties, in my opinion, is Miller Lite. It is cheap and does nothing. Obviously someone out east likes that Boston brew - but it is too expensive for the port party. Then there is the bottle vs. the can issue. Ah, this could be the longest thread in the Pearsonariel.org books.

I certainly think Commander Pete should weigh in on the subject.

I'll take whatever is being served, as long as its beer.

http://www.virtualbartender.beer.com/beer_usa.htm

Outhaul & Uphaul...(?) :confused:

Sailing last Friday with about 20kt winds and gusts. Had a bit of a puzzle when the outhaul parted on a broad reach.... :eek: Tough to tame that main when the foot is sliding half way up to the gooseneck, and the sail is doing it's best chute impression.....

Anyway, I have decided my 'outhaul' is not the ideal system. It had been a line from the eye in the top of the boom, through the clue back to a cleat on the side. (no real purchase).

I am wondering if anyone has any ideas short of Tony's new boom end?

I read that Peter Theis is using a 6:1 set up (how can you fit that?). What is
everyone else using? Pictures?


Also, in changing the line on the outhaul, I also replaced my downhaul (same size and vintage).

There is a line that raises the boom on the sailtrack.... a halyard that wraps around the mast and runs all the way up to a block just below the spreaders.... I am trying to figure this out. It is in opposition to the downhaul, and keeps the boom from dropping when the main is lowered.

Does this sound like what others have? If not, then what?

Thanks,

I've been pondering that too. Theres only about 6 inches between the end of the sail and the end of the boom.

I moved my old downhaul there, to get a 2:1 purchase. Doesn't work too well. Just no room.

I've been wondering if there might be some sort of lever that could be adapted for that spot. Something like a shroud lever

http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs...-1/10001/20086

Obviously, that thing wouldn't be suitable. But I only need to move the foot a few inches, tight for upwind and loose for downwind.

When I do adjust the outhaul, I'll often forget to adjust it back.

Here its too loose

Craig, that other line sounds like a strange topping lift.

Might be good for hauling up the boom so the sail fits more easily inside the sailcover.

I'd keep it if it works.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by c_amos

Outhaul & Uphaul...(?) :confused:. . . I am wondering if anyone has any ideas short of Tony's new boom end? Thanks,

---

Maika'i has an internal 4 to 1 outhaul system. The rigger created it on a sheet of aluminum, rolled it up and slid it into the boom, blocks and all. Eliminates fitting problems at the mast end. Should be a photo here someplace of the line exiting the boom about six inches back from the gooseneck.

Cunningham replaces the downhaul - fixed the goosneck car so it would not move from the "black band" sail alignment - making mainsail adjustments small and easy.

Internal outhaul is worth every penny spent. (About $200 in 1984 :) )

Will be posting photos of a new gooseneck mast assembly as soon as it's installed.

I'm missing something here - perhaps. The topping lift obviously goes to the end of the boom. The downhaul goes from the cabin deck to the gooseneck and back to the deck (a double block) to a cleat on the mast. The line I think you are talking about is the flag halyard that goes to the spreader and is used for pennants, to hoist the radar reflector and hopefully never a distress flag. That flag halyard is cleated to the mast somewhere at the level of the gooseneck. I have no other line to hold the gooseneck up (if I wanted to). Is there another line I should know about?

As for the outhaul issue: Until last year, I ran a 5:1 purchase outhaul configuration using a twin block with becket at the sail outhaul, and a triple block on the boom end (Ronstan mini blocks, but not as small as the new Harkens I will using - see below). You are correct about the limited space. The lines going back and forth between the blocks created too much friction, particularly when the outhaul was really stretched tight.

Last year I tried using a 3:1 purchase arrangement and it worked much better. So this year I will be using new smaller blocks, the Harken 405 (single with becket at the sail outhaul) and 406 double (on the boom end) and that should resolve the problem totally - knock on wood.

My main, incidentally is loose footed.

Incidentally, my outhaul line runs inside the boom to the forward end of the boom above the cabin top. After the line passes through the triple block on the boom (to be a double block in the new configuration), it passes around a Shaeffer cheek block and through a Shaeffer piece into the boom, coming back out just aft of the gooseneck, where there is a cleat for a tie on.

My two reefing lines have a similar set up, each with a two to one purchase. The line runs from a cringle at the bottom of the sail through a B011 slider in the boom slot, to a cringle at the reef point in the sail, back to a cheek block, into the boom, coming out just aft of the outhaul cleat. There is one quick reef line (one for each reef point) on either side of the boom.

Hope this all makes sense, but it seems to work.

If you consult catalogues by harken/ronstan they contain schematics(rather cro-magnon but still deliver the concept) that take most of the guesswork out of purchase questions...I agree with what was mentioned before regarding the cunningham eliminating the downhaul(if your boom won't lift then)....although if you race an ariel you might have to have the mainsail set a certain distance down from the masthead(i know thats the case w/olson 30's on SF bay) and the downhaul might help you better with this.....anyway consult the catalogues they give good ideas...
pk

I know it sounds confusing, but I think Commander Pete may have it.

Quote:

---

There is a line that raises the boom on the sail track.... a halyard that wraps around the mast and runs all the way up to a block just below the spreaders.... I am trying to figure this out. It is in opposition to the downhaul, and keeps the boom from dropping when the main is lowered.

Does this sound like what others have? If not, then what?

---

I have the regular 'topping lift' at the boom end, and also have the 'signal halyard' that runs from the stbd shroud to the end of the spreader. I even have another signal halyard that runs to just shy of the mast head. I think this one is to fly the Ensign on a pig stick (I would not try that, for fear of buggering up the windvane).



There is a block (really small) on the front of the mast, just below the spreaders. The line wraps around the side of the mast, and lifts the gooseneck when the sail is down. It seems strange to me that it would be run up this high, for this purpose. It also adds a step when raising the main. I have to; 1) slack the downhaul, 2) raise the main, 3) slack the uphaul, 4) tighten the downhaul......



I am thinking that I would like to get rid of this 'uphaul' all together, but as Commander Pete said;

Quote:

---

Might be good for hauling up the boom so the sail fits more easily inside the sail cover.

---

And that is exactly what I use it for. The custom sail cover I had made when I got my new sails fits snug when the gooseneck is about 2/3 of the way up this track..... so something will have to hold it up there.



Do the others (who have not modified their goosenecks) just let them drop to the bottom of the track when you lower the main?

[size=3][/size]

I don't have a couple of your bonus halyards. My mast is cluttered enough with 5 lines headed up (main halyard, jib halyard, spinnaker halyard, topping lift, and flag halyard to spreader), one down (downhaul). and three out (outhaul, and two quick reefs)

But to answer your question, yes, I just let it drop to the bottom of the track.

Actually, this is a benefit when I put in a reef, because the weight of the boom at the gooseneck holds the cringle for the reef in the reef hook at the gooseneck until the sail is again hoisted with the completed reef.

Also, when I have my sunshade on (which is really a misnamed rain cover), the cover, which rides over the boom, is down low at the front so the wind and rain don't blow under it to get everything wet, or so the cover can be lifted and blown off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by c_amos

Outhaul & Uphaul...(?) :confused:

... I am wondering if anyone has any ideas short of Tony's new boom end?...

---

Sure, I have a harken 6:1 magic box near the end of the boom. I put a small block at the end of the boom. So the outhaul goes from the clew of the main, back to the end of the boom, through the block and forward on the boom for a few feet and terminates at the moving end of the majic box. To adjust outhaul tension, just pull onthe small line exiting the box, and voile' ...6:1 advantage and about 6" of adjustment range.
To cleat it off, I just mounted a small "lance cleat" (a wonderful little toy from RWO, you should check them out). I made sure to put the lance cleat far enough forward on the boom so as to be able to adjust it even when sailing on a run with the main let way out. But not so far forward as to need to leave the cockpit when sailing on a beat. I don't think I have a picture, but will look when I get home.

The small line exiting the magic box is plenty long enough to lead forward, down to some turning blocks and

At the dock, after the main was lowered and gasketted, we simply hooked the main halyard shackle to the tack hook and gently raised the boom to the upper end of the track using the main halyard winch. We then set the small slider (looked custom made) thumbscrew to hold it there. Gave us more headroom in the cockpit, so's you didn't clunk your beverage bottle on the boom and spill any.

Capt. Amos - that little block on the front of the mast just below the spreaders is for the spinnaker pole topping lift.

Carted my main and genoa to Bluffton Bay Sails http://www.blufftonbaysails.com/staff.html for a tummy tuck and restitching.

Jim suggested that my 40 year old main would do better loose footed, so I am loose footed now. I asked about some of the issues within this thread - stress on the boom, vang issues, and he felt like due to the shape of my main (stretched out, old, and tired) that the stress points on my boom were currently only at the ends - as they would be loose footed. The bag at boom level was doing nothing to spread the load. He felt that I was probably having to far overtighten all of my sail controls just to get some sort of decent sail shape and that the loose foot would actually relieve some stress. I must admit that I probably missed a fair portion of his comments due to lack of sail construction knowledge, but the upshot is as I am presenting it. I figure it is a limited-risk experiment. Given its tired status, at worst I would have to replace the sail - which I had been pondering anyway.

He's pricing out a house-brand roller furling genoa for me. He is a North Sails shop, but that stuff is too rich for my blood.

Anyone have access to whomever might create the press-on Commander ensignia for my main? He has a guy in CA who has the Commander image in his files - the ready to apply images are $50 a side. Other resources out there?

We worked with 'Super-Duper' Joe Cooper at hood sails America. I honestly can't remember the cost of insignia/number application but you could give them a try. Joe's a hoot to talk with and has some interesting stories and insight.

I bought some adhesive-backed insignia cloth from Sailrite and copied the insignia from my old main. My 5 pointed star copy was looking a little cock-eyed so I checked the point locations with a set of dividers and recut it ever-so-slightly smaller to get it balanced right. It turns out that copying/tracing was more awkward than using dividers to find the 5 points of the star. I trimmed the bars down slightly to match. Lesson learned: you can make the Commander insignia from scratch easier than copying it. I used colored chalk to lay out position markers on the sail and stuck 'em on. It seems to be working fine. Looks like the original to me from the deck.