Arne wrote:

David and Slieve,

yes, I can imagine that junkrigs with flatter tops and shorter yards are less prone to fanning up than sails with the fan-topped H-M planforms. Still, they are not bullet-proof unless some positive device is used to hold the top down. Slieve has produced a very clever set of combined downhaul-batten parrels  which should take care of this.

Ingeborg's sail (as Frk. Sørensen's) now makes use of a grand total of  five running lines, all lead to the cockpit. They are: Halyard, sheet, YHP, THP and the new FUP.

Could I ask how many running lines you have on your rigs?

Arne

PS: I have now tied down the tackline (with that rubber snubber on) to act as a kicking strap. The everyday benefit of it is to keep the leech of the lowest panel taut, so there is no sign of it fluttering. The cambered panels are good in keeping the leech taut and flutter-free.

My point is that they seem to be proof against F-U without anything to hold the top down. Yes, Slieve's downhauls would inhibit the battens from rising (so long as they are far enough aft on the battens, so only really applicable to split rigs),  but when I do a wild gybe, my battens rise but nothing goes wrong!

I have halyard, sheet, YHP, LHP. A lower LHP is optional, as it is on H-M sails, but helps with keeping the luff taut when deep reefed. Again, it's something that inshore sailors may not need. Most of the time, it's redundant. A spanned downhaul is as good at doing that, and I may change back. 

I agree, some camber in the panels helps to keep the leech from fluttering. That's one reason why I put some in, as well as hinges.

David and Slieve,

yes, I can imagine that junkrigs with flatter tops and shorter yards are less prone to fanning up than sails with the fan-topped H-M planforms. Still, they are not bullet-proof unless some positive device is used to hold the top down. Slieve has produced a very clever set of combined downhaul-batten parrels  which should take care of this.

Ingeborg's sail (as Frk. Sørensen's) now makes use of a grand total of  five running lines, all lead to the cockpit. They are: Halyard, sheet, YHP, THP and the new FUP.

Could I ask how many running lines you have on your rigs?

Arne

PS: I have now tied down the tackline (with that rubber snubber on) to act as a kicking strap. The everyday benefit of it is to keep the leech of the lowest panel taut, so there is no sign of it fluttering. The cambered panels are good in keeping the leech taut and flutter-free.

Arne wrote:

A final thing: The FUP line now works fine without getting jammed as the sail is furled. Still, on a sail with heavier battens, I can see Graham’s point in having a two-part FUP, to minimise friction.

Arne

Arne wrote:

Frank, 

here is how I have strapped down Ingeborg's mast. I also wanted to keep the mast from rotating. As can be seen, I smeared some glue in the screw-holes and under the ss-steel hoops before screwing them in place. This is not a particularly wet place (it's dry, actually), so haven't found it necessary to use epoxy.

I don't claim that this is the 'right', or even a 'good' way of doing it, but it seems to work for me. I have put much more effort in avoiding any leaks past the partners. Even a drop a week is unacceptable.

Arne

 

It may be the angle of the photos, but I can't see how that is holding the mast down.  It looks as if the lashings are almost parallel to the step.   I get that how that will keep it from turning, but isn't there enough play to allow the mast to work its way upward?

Frank, 

here is how I have strapped down Ingeborg's mast. I also wanted to keep the mast from rotating. As can be seen, I smeared some glue in the screw-holes and under the ss-steel hoops before screwing them in place. This is not a particularly wet place (it's dry, actually), so haven't found it necessary to use epoxy.

I don't claim that this is the 'right', or even a 'good' way of doing it, but it seems to work for me. I have put much more effort in avoiding any leaks past the partners. Even a drop a week is unacceptable.

Arne