Jonathan Snodgrass wrote:

David Tyler wrote: Jonathan,

I agree with Paul, concerning strong attachments for a drogue, well out from the centreline. I have put in two big eyebolts, pointing inwards somewhat, in the direction that the pull is likely to come as the drogue tries to haul the boat straight after she's wandered. The bridle needs to have stainless steel thimbled eyes which are shackled on to the eyebolts. Any kind of drogue will be putting on an enormous load in 50 knots of wind, and lines through a fairlead don't stand a chance, fendered or not. In order to assist with recovery, I would suggest a third line (one of your mooring lines), attached to the far end of the bridle, kept slack normally, and long enough to put onto your biggest winch.

Having said all that, I've only rigged my drogue as a trial, and haven't actually needed it in more than 60,000 miles of sailing on Tystie. You would be very unlucky indeed to need a drogue in June and July. Just possibly a strong gale as you come into soundings in the Western Approaches would raise enough of a steep sea, but in a "normal" gale, with regular seas, I would have thought that Lexia would be fine, with a scrap of sail up, and steered by the Hydrovane.

This is an extract from my e mail sent to Oceanbrake this morning.  I have sent the full text to David separately.  I await a response from Oceanbrake.  I am open to any further advice on fixing eye bolts to the transom or indeed chain plates to the hull.  Jonathan

Dear Roddy

This subject of the Jordan Series Drogue has been raised by me and now much discussed on the General Forum of the Junk Rig Association.  It is viewable by the public, albeit the contributors are shown as Anon.  You could look at the whole thing.  Please note the good free "advertising".  However, for your convenience, I enclose a couple of extracts below for your information. 

 

                       (Paul and David's comments were inserted  here)

 

So, the considered opinion is that I must bite the bullet and look at mounting either your chain plates or big eye bolts. 

 

There seem to be two options available:  chain plates as prescribed by Mr Jordan and supplied by you;  eye bolts as installed by David Tyler on his boat Tystie. 

 

I have a lot of respect for David Tyler and his work and opinion.  Also, I would find it easier to fix two big eye bolts to the transom (flat surface inside and out, easier to back it off inside, easier to drill one big hole, etc)  rather than chain plates to the hull on the quarters.  This assumes that substantial stainless steel eye bolts are available ex stock in Plymouth, which I think that they will be.  I am not sure what size but it will probably be a case of "if it looks right it will be right".  David's statement that he has inclined his eye bolts in the direction of pull causes me some concern.  That sounds to be more difficult to arrange needing tapered pads inside and out.  I suspect however that it is the usual Tyler council of perfection, and that straight for and aft would be acceptable.  I am not sure about the orientation of the eye ie horizontal or vertical, but I presume that vertical would be acceptable.  I presume that they should be as far outboard as is achievable, subject to still being able to provide a substantial all round backing inside.  It sounds as if it is desirable to have the fixings as low as possible towards the water line from a performance point of view.  However, they presumably need to be easily reachable from above in order to be able to secure the bridles and shackles to the eye bolts whilst underway.  One is not always going to have them attached.  That sounds to me like not much below the top of the transom.  I would accept that mounting chain plates on the hull might be stronger but I hope that the transom would be strong enough.  The hull including the transom is pretty strong.  The hull was laid up in C Glass over a male frame to form the male plug which was then used to make the femal mould.  It is very thick.  I have been told that it is stronger than the moulded  hulls.  It was then used as the hull for the boat.  Etc,etc.

 

However, all that can be worked out, I hope.  The critical items are:

 

• I will not be securing the bridles from the cleats and so will require them to be standard length for the width of the transom and they should end in a hard eye for the shackle.

 

• I presume that I will use eye bolts through the transom unless persuaded to buy and use the chain plates that you supply (Polished stainless steel, £60 per pair undrilled) . 

 

Could you please therefore requote for the bridle and delete the webbing tube.

 

Could you please comment on the above if you have any concerns.

 

Yours etc, jds

Brian Kerslake wrote: Hi Jonathan

Great to hear from you and of course my insinuation that you 'must be mad' was just a joke. Of course we all suffer from the same madness/obsession, in varying degrees. Beats watching telly or endless domestic diy which has been the 'joy' of my life for the last couple of years.

I have an e-bay account so will see if anything useful is on offer and advise - you never know. Failing that you would be very welcome to 'borrow' my trailable charger (as above) as your need is greater than mine and I 'owe you one' for the magnificent sail in Lexia, er, last year?, which, along with much helpful advice from this site, persuaded me to go cambered (agree with your 'add two zeros' comment). Remember 'Paradox' is in Portland and, while I can't be there to watch you set off on June 5th (grandkids visiting) we will be there, Sunbirds alllowing, replacing the Freedom sails (nice in principle but pretty impractical really) from May 19th. So we could get the device to you somehow. Once we've re-rigged and trialled we'll be heading west and south.

Also, if you need a 'face' in Weymouth to chase up/sort out your drogue, just ask. It's only a couple of miles from Portland, and I have an old folks' bus pass for as long as Herr Cameron allows.

Best wishes

Brian Kerslake

'Paradox'

Portland Marina - 2012 Olympics base - see new web site -

http://www.deanreddyhoff.co.uk/portland-marina/

Jonathan Snodgrass wrote:

As regards the Series Drogue, I have now spoken to Mr Oceanbrake, who is adamant that the drogue needs to be attached with a bridle from each quarter, for geometric and dynamic reasons, so a bridle it has to be, although I will ask for extra length to back it  up to the midships cleats and for webbing tube as sacrificial chafe at the fairleads. 

Mark Thomasson wrote:

Very much enjoyed this subject and all the wonderful replies from sailors with real experience.  Isn't the JRA great!

Small clarifiction for Jonathan,  does the AIS transmit as well as recieve?  Given a choice, which would come first the Sea-me or the AIS?

many thanks

Mark Thomasson 

Mark, Good question.

For OSTAR 2009 it was a requirement to have an active radar target enhancer.  I bought a Sea Me (it is not the only make) which at that time was produced as X band only.  There was no requirement to have AIS but I decided to buy a  passive AIS, sometimes referred to as an "AIS radar" because of the radar like display.  I thought that the Sea Me with the bleeper on would tell me when we (that is Lexia and I) had been hit by a radar and then I would look at the passive AIS to see what ships nearby were transimitting AIS signatures.  The passive AIS radar was cheapish, say £200 and effective, although it had only a black and grey screen.  To allow it to function through the masthead VHF antenna at the same time (or at least mulitplexed) with the VHF radio, I purchased a splitter.  This also allows the FM radio to use the antenna.  The splitter requires power, but a small load only, although it is yet another 24 hour load. 

For AZAB 2011 I am still required to have an active radar target enhancer.  However Sea Me (and others) have produced dual X and S band machines and so I decided to trade in my original with Sea Me and paid the difference for a X and S band machine.

However, it is now an ISAF Category One requirement to have an "AIS transponder" ie send and receive.  This has I presume been prompted by the production of Class B sets aimed at the leisure market.  They do not include all the whistles that the Class A commercial sets include, but they include all the bells that a small boat leisure sailor is likely to require.  My Raymarine set cost about £800 from memory.  (The cheapest supplier I could find in UK was Redcar Electonics who were very helpful and effecient.) It is colour and bright, which I find very helpful as the eyes are not what they used to be.  Fortunately the splitter was adequate for an active Class B, but would not have been suitable for an active Class A. 

As so often, I considered keeping the passive set as a reserve for the active set but decided that this was probably not justified.  I have sold it to someone else in Millbay marina for half what I paid for it. 

Now to your question, given a choice which would come first, Sea Me or AIS.  The answer must be AIS.  I base this on the assumption that you have or at a reasonable cost could have a passive radar reflector, which goes someway to meet the need to be seen on radar.  However, AIS has provided a whole new world of safety enhancement and the only way into that is to buy a set.  For the cost of a passive set and a separate antenna or an antenna splitter, you can be part of that scene.   If you take the view that the best rule of collision safety is for the small sail boat sailor to assume that might is right, a passive set gives you sufficient information to avoid all the big commercial vessels that will constantly tell you exactly what they are, what their name and call sign and MMSI are, where they are, what they are doing, where they are going and how near you and they will pass (closest point of approach) and when that will happen.  You can also set range rings and warnings.  If your VHF set is modern and up market, (mine isn't), it can be linked to the AIS so that you can highlight a target on the AIS screen and call it on VHF DSC automatically. For me to call a ship digitally, I would have to enter their  MMSI on my radio which is at best tortuous.  I would however at least be able to call it by name.  I generally keep the screen as "North Up" but if it is getting a bit hectic and I am tired, I will switch to "Course Up" which helps to tell me where I should look from the boat, eg "port bow", without having to do any mental gymnastics. 

However, if you can afford it, an active AIS gives another reassurance that you have done everything possible to give them their best possible chance of avoiding hitting you, if that is what the collision avoidance rules say that they should do.  Then an active AIS would definitely be a priority purchase over a Sea Me.  Remember the Ouzo collision.  With active AIS on both vessels (not practical then but practical now) they would probably not have collided. 

However, don't forget that for motor vessels engaged in fishing, you as a sail boat are the give way vessel. 

I talked recently to someone who drives big "Grey Funnel Line" vessels and he pointed out that on operations or exercises, they may switch off their AIS, radars and lights, for obvious reasons, which just goes to show that you can take your precautions only so far ... 

I hope that all that helps.  

As regards the Series Drogue, I have now spoken to Mr Oceanbrake, who is adamant that the drogue needs to be attached with a bridle from each quarter, for geometric and dynamic reasons, so a bridle it has to be, although I will ask for extra length to back it  up to the midships cleats and for webbing tube as sacrificial chafe at the fairleads. 

Jonathan