New boat purchase Tripp 30 yawl

<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
  • 22 Dec 2022 13:18
    Reply # 13033157 on 13016084
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Just a little break from the pre-Christmas stress:

    In case it is difficult to find a taller mast, here is a way of raising the 38' mast enough to set my suggested sail. This tube type 'mast socket' may well be an advantage ofer a conventionally rigged mast. It will probably bi quicker to step and unstep the mast with this setup. You will need a crane to launch the boat anyway, so stepping the mast this way should be easy. As can be seen, the mast step can this way sit a little half metre above the bottom. I guess it will be resting on a stout 15mm galvanized bolt (slot shown).


    I agree with Graeme about the mizzen. If it is to be made from scratch, I would just make it as a flat triangle with no battens. The camber can be adjusted from perfectly flat to as baggy as one likes with a clew outhaul (loose-footed sail).

    Back to work...

    Arne

    Diagram in Album: Arne's sketches, section 7-3

  • 22 Dec 2022 00:09
    Reply # 13032738 on 13016084
    Deleted user

    Arne, thank you for the updated drawing.

    I can, perhaps, find a light post that would provide the height necessary for the sail you drew. The current mizzen mast is stayed. There are forward and aft stays and there is a small one leading from the mast just below the boom aft to the deck. If my compromise is that I have two main sheets. One attached port and one starboard, that wouldn't be bad; maybe. I'll try it without doing something like that first though. The mizzen mast step provides a place for the main sheet in the current sloop configuration. That will be the first place I try to route the mainsheet for the junk sail configuration.

    According to sail data this sailboat was underpowered. Its SA/Disp was around 13. With Arne's sail plan of 43.8 its back up to 16.4. If i add in the mizzen it gets to 18. 

    The mizzen step is already a part of the sailboat. I've attached a picture showing the mizzen mast in place within the step. I want to leave the mizzen as is because the step is there, the chain plates are there, etc. Maybe in the future I'll mess with it but it will be challenging enough to get a junk rig worked out.

    Consider the moving of the mainsail one variable and the moving of the mizzen another variable. Solving 1 variable problems are much easier than 2 variable problems. Plus I like the location of the mizzen as it currently exists.

    This boat will be launched with a crane in the marina. I will not be backing a trailer into the water. I'll launch it for the season and take it home at the end of the season.




    P.S. Any poor English writing/grammar is a reflection of myself and me typing on an iPad. Keyboards are a lot nicer to get correct grammar. It should have been "I wouldn't say...". It was a typo. 

    1 file
  • 20 Dec 2022 23:29
    Reply # 13031532 on 13016084
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Sorry, but now I HAVE TO turn my back to this discussion for a few days, so can only say ...

    Merry, peaceful Christmas to all of you!

    Best regards,
    Arne

  • 20 Dec 2022 23:25
    Reply # 13031528 on 13031067
    Anonymous member (Administrator)
    Jan wrote:

    Interesting example of how US English is diverging from "Old World" English in a linguistically confusing manner. When Dean says "I would say that it’s a trailer sailer such that you can take it home every weekend " it translates to English English as "I wouldn't say that it's a trailer sailer in that you could take it home every weekend". Americans have dropped the "n't", they also say "I could care less" where in the Olde World we say "I couldn't care less" which is way more logical. Just throwing this in here as what Dean said could be misinterpreted. 


    Thanks for that, Jan. I wondered if it was a typo or something...

    Arne

  • 20 Dec 2022 21:49
    Reply # 13031446 on 13016084
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Arne, I think that second suggestion of yours is a real improvement and I think it's also closer to what Dean was wanting.

    I would defer to your judgement, but it seems to me there is still plenty of room for sheetlet spans for the mainsheet.


    The beauty of it is, no boomkin is required. (I think a boomkin on that boat, with its long, delicate overhangs, would be unwieldy and would spoil it).

    As you say, a rigging cage there would be no real disadvantage, and a safety factor on that after deck, although I don't understand why the mast can't be free standing in that position, or very close to it, even offset if necessary. 

    I think your second suggestion is an improvement. If it were mine, I would make the mainsail just a little less in area than you have given, and make that mizzen flat cut and with no roach, and put lazyjacks on it. That mizzen will look good and it will "earn its keep".

    I suppose you are right, that the keel/rudder arrangement might make a cat-rigged yawl a little bit hard-mouthed when running in a stiff breeze - but with your somewhat higher balance - and also, that is a real pedigree hull shape which ought  to pick up a bit more length and directional stability when heeled - I would remain confident it would be good with your suggested junk rig. I can imagine running down wind in a stiff breeze that the mizzen would be furled, and in the worst case scenario there is still the option of adding an end plate to the rudder. For that matter, just lowering a panel and reducing sail area a little is probably all that would be needed if it gets a bit too lively.

    (After all, imagine all that over-hanging counter stern was removed - the result would be a transom-hung rudder and a hull profile not so different from your very successful Ingeborg!)

    Well done, I say.


    Last modified: 20 Dec 2022 22:21 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 20 Dec 2022 16:48
    Reply # 13031087 on 13016084
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Graeme

    Just for fun, I replaced my first mizzen with the original mizzen from the Bermudan rig. With the sail being bigger, the resulting 2-sail CE ended up just a couple of inches aft of my first attempt. Due to the position of that mast, it will have to be stayed. That may well be a good idea, as the shrouds will provide a safe ‘cage’ back there.
    The only drawback I see with this setup, is that some clearance is lost for the main sheet.

    Arne


    (PS: The diagrams sit in my album called Arne’s diagrams, section 7)


    Last modified: 20 Dec 2022 16:51 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 20 Dec 2022 16:24
    Reply # 13031067 on 13016084

    Interesting example of how US English is diverging from "Old World" English in a linguistically confusing manner. When Dean says "I would say that it’s a trailer sailer such that you can take it home every weekend " it translates to English English as "I wouldn't say that it's a trailer sailer in that you could take it home every weekend". Americans have dropped the "n't", they also say "I could care less" where in the Olde World we say "I couldn't care less" which is way more logical. Just throwing this in here as what Dean said could be misinterpreted. 

  • 20 Dec 2022 16:08
    Reply # 13031057 on 13030572
    Anonymous wrote:

    Hmm, thank you for the input Arne. I’m hoping the conversion will work because I’d rather not keep it as a sloop. I got ahold of some magazine (from the early 60s) of the sail plan. The mizzenmast in your drawing won’t work because the boat itself is set up to have the mizzenmast mast just behind the tiller.

    "is set up for"? Does this mean the mizzen mast step is already in place? If not, the work of putting a mizzen mast in will still be the same work no matter where you put it. If you have an outboard motor in the space aft of the design mizzen then offsetting the mast to one side would be an option.

    ‘’would making the sail smaller be better? To keep the mizzenmast where it is I mean. Or maybe a smaller sail can go more forward?

    As mentioned in other responses, a larger mizzen would be needed forward. Really, this means do the math :)  I think there is nothing wrong with adding a larger mizzen farther forward (you may then want to downsize the main slightly) so long as the gap from the aft of the main to the fore of the mizzen is wide enough for the sheets. Some have suggested a 1 meter gap as minimum but be aware that minimum is not ideal and greater is always better.

    For trailering question, I can put it on a trailer because it fits in U.S. road limits. I would say that it’s a trailer sailer such that you can take it home every weekend. I would only take it home during winter. The vehicle will be my 3/4 ton suburban or I’ll by a 1 ton truck.

    A good 3/4 ton will handle that no problem I think. I like having 4wd for the low position. However, even living in an area where boat ramps are every few miles, putting a large boat in the water is not a treat. By large I mean anything over 20-ish feet long. I have spent the last two summers in a 24ft cabin cruiser (no keel) and had to choose carefully where and when to launch. I can't imagine doing the same with a 30ft... with any kind of keel.

    Of course maybe you only mean getting to the launch site where you will use a crane to launch, in which case there would be no problem.

    Last modified: 20 Dec 2022 16:09 | Anonymous member
  • 20 Dec 2022 15:24
    Reply # 13030983 on 13029335
    Anonymous wrote:The same goes for underwater body. There, most designers operate with the term CLR or Centre of Lateral Resistance. This too is only the geometrical centre of the profile area, with or without counting with the rudder.
    I have always wondered about that one too. Except on a hard chine boat, the only part of the underwater for that presents much "Lateral Resistance" is the keel and rudder. At least on our boat the rest of the hull gently guides water under the boat when moving sideways without much resistance. As the keel does have some foil shape to it (even in 1969 they understood some of that), I would expect the CLR could just as easily be reported as about 1/3 back from the leading edge of the keel. I would also note that the point found by balancing the underwater shape is pretty close to the same. So maybe good hull and keel design put them that way.

    Note the liberal use of words like wonder, expect, maybe... all of which might well be equated with "guess".

  • 20 Dec 2022 09:45
    Reply # 13030733 on 13016084
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    A question Arne. Could the mizzen be placed forward where the original mizzen was, and just make it larger (as the original mizzen was) ?

    Last modified: 20 Dec 2022 09:49 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software