Forgot password

Ingeborg, Arne's Marieholm IF

  • 06 Jun 2017 21:53
    Quote
    Reply # 4883919 on 4883682
    Anonymous member
    Arne Kverneland wrote: 



     Still, we gained on her quite easily and soon we were about to overtake her, when we split up.

    I've had that happen to me - some people really don't like being overtaken by a junk!

    The Marieholm IF,

    together with a 35sqm cambered panel JR,
    plus fresh antifouling      -
      is a seriously good combination.


    Arne, my friend, I do believe you have forgotten one very important part of the equations: + with Arne on the helm!
  • 06 Jun 2017 20:30
    Quote
    Reply # 4883725 on 3032430
    Deleted user

    I have to say, Arne, that she is one of the most beautiful, practical, and elegant boats I've seen.
  • 06 Jun 2017 20:01
    Quote
    Reply # 4883682 on 3032430
    Anonymous member (Administrator)
     



     

    Typical!

    During all the years I had my Alo 28, Johanna, I hardly spotted another Alo. Only yesterday, as I and a mate had just taken out Ingeborg for a spin, did an Alo pass us in the opposite direction. She was tacking her way upwind and that was simply an irresistible temptation to us, so we turned around. The Alo already had over 100m lead. Still, we gained on her quite easily and soon we were about to overtake her, when we split up. It appeared that the speed through the water was very similar (between 4 and 5 kts, wind about F3), but Ingeborg simply tacked well inside the other boat. I roughly assessed the difference in pointing angle to be between 3 and 5°. The Alo was simply drifting to leeward. So what was wrong with her then? Nothing I could spot. The sails were not old rags  -  quite the opposite: The mainsail was a tri-radial, full-length-batten job, no less, and the jib was one of these tall narrow 100% jibs, perfectly suited for the job that day. The whole ship looked very smart.

    I put this observation in the heap of hints I have got recently, and I dare conclude now:

    The Marieholm IF,
    together with a 35sqm cambered panel JR,
    plus fresh antifouling      -
      is a seriously good combination.

    Cheers, Arne

    PS:
    Before we went back to the berth, my crew jumped ashore with my camera. With me scooting back and forth on the bay, he took over fifty photos, plus a little video clip. Here are a few of them.

      
  • 01 Jun 2017 23:08
    Quote
    Reply # 4875534 on 3032430
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Sailing Ingeborg, now with fresh antifouling

    Today I and a friend had a 3-4-hour spin in Ingeborg, only two weeks after she got her new antifouling. The wind was around 8 and up to 10kts from around west.

    The setting of the sail:
    To begin with I wasn’t completely happy with it, but it turned out to set better and better the more I sailed, and without me tweaking the parrels. When arriving at home, I could no longer tell which way I should have adjusted the parrels, the YHP, THP or HKPs, so I guess they were ok.

    Speed:
    Ingeborg is clearly a different     and much faster animal now than she was on my trial sails last year. I am particularly impressed with her upwind performance. I checked her tacks on the GPS, and even there, after leeway, did the tacking angle stay around 90°. Speeds were between 4.5 and 5kts, in that moderate wind (healing 15 – 25°). Moreover, when I tack her, I get surprised that the sail fills so early on the new tack. Ingeborg’s trim hull, heavy ballast and big keel area allows me to sheet the sail in really close. I am quite convinced that I have not owned such a close-winded boat before. Some of you, who have tested my old Johanna, were quite impressed with her, but I would say that Ingeborg is two-three notches faster (Johanna was normally outpointed to windward by a well-sailed Nordic Folkboat). That IF is so eager to go!

    Using the tiller brake:
    I found the tiller brake to work exceptionally well on Ingeborg. We sailed long stretches with the tiller locked (between beam reach and fully close-hauled). Actually, I could leave the tiller locked ‘forever’, except when traffic or lack of water in front of us forced me to take over. At one time we rounded a point and were to bear away a bit. All I did then, was to ease the sheet, and the boat just ’followed the sail’      -  no need for readjusting the tiller.
    Therefore: I seriously recommend making that tiller lock (..it is more a tiller lock than a tiller brake...).

    Cheers,
    Arne

    PS:
    I begin to wonder if there is an extra advantage with the sloop JR with a fairly broad chord: My guess is that most of the self-steering effect  comes from the movement back and forth of the sail’s  centre of pressure, CP, as the angle of attack, AOA, varies. At a low AOA, the CP moves forward and at a higher AOA, the CP moves aft. On a broad-chord sloop sail, as on Ingeborg (the chord/waterline=0.80), the movement of the CP is enough to give a quite strong self-steering effect (this is helped by the behaviour of the hull; more heel gives more weather helm, etc).



    Last modified: 02 Jun 2017 14:48 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 16 Sep 2016 20:17
    Quote
    Reply # 4253656 on 3032430
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Scott,
    yes, that is how I tension the sail along the battens; with lashings. On Johanna’s blue sail (2002), I went in the other direction. After sailing her for a while, I slackened the sail about 1,7% along the battens to aid bulging. This lead to deeper camber   -  and more “smiling wrinkles” along the battens. I felt that that sail became more powerful ( but no guarantees).

     When making a copy of Johanna’s sail for Edmond Dantes (2012), I added more round along each panel and then again added more tension (not extreme) along the battens. I never got along to measure the resulting camber, but it looked good. When making Frøken Sørensen’s sail (2013), I used my Chain Calculator and aimed for 9% camber, but thanks to stretching this sail too along the battens, the resulting camber ended on 8%. Actually that was what I wanted, and I again got this trapeze-like vertical curve.

    So what is best? I doubt if there is much difference. However, I guess I now prefer to have a bit tension to reduce the amount of wrinkles along the battens. I also like the look of the more trapeze-like vertical curve in each panel.

    Remember, my barrel only method is a compromise. If you are a better craftsman and generally in the tidy league, you may get the cambered panels to set better if you insert about three (false or true) broadseams along the rounded curves before assembling the sail, panel by panel. That should remove the wrinkles and most probably not do damage to the main camber.

    Slieve McGalliard has described how to do that.

    I am way too lazy to bother. My main focus with respect to creases is to avoid the big diagonal, camber-robbing ones.

    Arne

    PS:
    Below is a couple of photos from yesterday of Ingeborg’s sail, sailing close-hauled on the mast-to-weather tack. See captions.
    PPS:
    We are enjoying a real Indian Summer here now, so I am glad I am “back in the saddle” again.

     

     

    Last modified: 16 Sep 2016 20:17 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 16 Sep 2016 13:52
    Quote
    Reply # 4253124 on 4248272
    Deleted user
    Arne Kverneland wrote:

    The shadows of the lee topping lift reveals a very trapeze-like vertical camber, much unlike the more D-shaped curve in Johanna’s panels. That is the result of putting a bit tension in the sail along the battens.  


     Arne,

    "Tension along the battens" - is that with lashings at either end of the pockets to pull the sail tight horizontally? 

    That flat vertical profile looks, to my eye, more efficient.  If you played with the tension, do you think you'd get a performance difference? 

    That flat section offers a nice area for you to mess around with your new vortex generators.

     
  • 13 Sep 2016 22:35
    Quote
    Reply # 4248272 on 3032430
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

     Finally, after a long break, I and mate Allan could take Ingeborg out for an evening spin, yesterday. The wind was blowing from SE at around 12kts, I guess, and we varied the sail area between 6 and 7 panels up.

    As we ran for home  we headed almost right into the low sunlight. I took a couple of lo-res photos with my mobile, which may be of some interest for the geeks:
    The shadows of the lee topping lift reveals a very trapeze-like vertical camber, much unlike the more D-shaped curve in Johanna’s panels. That is the result of putting a bit tension in the sail along the battens. As it is here, its setting is closer to that of panels made with the boom-shelf method, although my sail as are all made using the barrel-only method (plus Amateur Method B).
    See for yourself.

    Cheers, Arne

       
  • 11 Jul 2016 20:34
    Quote
    Reply # 4124311 on 3032430
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Robert,
    these days I don’t know anyone else with an IF. However, a friend of mine has a Nordic Folkboat with good sails. That boat is supposed to be one or two percent slower than the IF, if none of them sets a spinnaker, so we can make decent comparisons. Frankly, I doubt if I can beat that FB to windward, but should be happy enough to be only 3-4% slower. On all the other legs, I am pretty sure my IF will be faster. Therefore, in a race from A to A, around something, my guess is that the IF will be fastest.

    Compared to the Alo 28, the IF is supposed to be around 1% slower (according to handicaps), if both use spinnaker. Johanna’s wll. is around 75cm longer. The hull speed of the Alo 28 is about 6.3kts while that of the IF is around 6.0.

    I am not so worried about the IF’s extra wetted surface. I get paid back in lack of leeway. Johanna had a quite inefficient foil in her fin keel, as most of its iron was in the bulb. She surely went well on flat water, but she struggled with leeway in a lumpy sea, and also when coming out of a tack. I have yet to try Ingeborg upwind against some swell, but she surely accelerates well out of a tack, and always goes where I point her.

    Yesterday, while being fully close-hauled, a gust hit us and half of the side deck went under. No problem, Ingeborg’s reaction was just to pick up speed , and then some more speed...

    That is good enough for me.

    Arne

     
  • 11 Jul 2016 18:07
    Quote
    Reply # 4124031 on 4123051
    Deleted user
    Arne Kverneland wrote:

    We may be a quarter or half a knot slow upwind until I get scrubbed the bottom, but I’m not worried about that. The sail, which was resting for so long before being fitted, now looks magnificent  -  that is  -  in my eyes...

    Arne

    Will you have local bermuda-rigged IF's to sail againist? That's the real apples-to-apples comparison for the rig. I'd expect a lower VMG to windward but you'd catch and pass(?) off the wind (no spinnaker). However, I could be wrong about the windward leg.


    The D/L of the IF is pretty close to the Alo 28 (Johanna) but the big difference should be in the SA/WS, i.e. between the wetted surface of the full keel IF versus the fin-keeled Alo.

    robert self

    Last modified: 11 Jul 2016 18:13 | Deleted user
  • 11 Jul 2016 00:33
    Quote
    Reply # 4123168 on 3032430
    Anonymous

    That rig's a real beauty, Arne!  She looks great.  Congratulations.

    Last modified: 11 Jul 2016 00:34 | Anonymous
       " ...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