First sail in Ingeborg, 2019

Yesterday I made use of the suddenly human temperatures in Stavanger, and took my Ingeborg out for a little spin. Here is a little, mostly technical photo review of it.

No fancy drone video show, I am afraid...

Arne

Thanks, David,
I made that typo while correcting another one...

About Ingeborg’s mast (150mm x 5mm 6082-T6):
It appears to be plenty, both strong and stiff enough. I can hardly notice any bending of the mast, neither from the cockpit, nor on photos. I would be tempted to use this dimension even on a boat approaching 3 ton displacement *): The fine thing with an unstayed mast is that it shows the load. In case it shows signs of bending much, close to deck, all one has to do is to unstep the mast and insert a three-meter long inner tube. This does not have to be a close fit. Just grab the best one can get, and then shim out the inner tube with 3-4 ‘waistbelts’ of glass tape, set in epoxy. One even doesn’t have to glue that inner tube in place. Just fix it with a couple of screws next to the mast step to keep things together while stepping or unstepping the mast. That simple measure could easily beef up the mast strength with 50%.

Another thing with Ingeborg’s mast:
It doesn’t tremble. Malena’s, and in particular Johanna’s mast (both wooden) could tremble in a breeze. It was not during sailing, but in harbour, with the sail down and with me down below. The frequency seemed to be in resonance with my nerves, somehow, and kind of scared me, no matter how safe and secure the boat was. Needless to say, I tried avoid this by altering the tension in the halyard and lazyjacks, but in the end it appeared that the frequency had to do with the mast alone.
On Ingeborg, the mast can also oscillate in strong winds, but the natural frequency is much lower, so doesn’t feel annoying at all. My guess is that the softer material and smaller diameter of the lower mast plays in here. Bad vibes verus good vibes...

Epoxy:
I used West Epoxy. This has been used on three boats, Edmond Dantes, Frøken Sørensen, and now on Ingeborg. The epoxy joint on Frøken Sørensen’s yard was thoroughly painted (2013) and looked good last time I saw her. On Edmond, that epoxy string was never painted, so bits of it started coming down after just a couple of years. Since fitting a string of Sikaflex or similar would be much simpler, I would rather recommend that method, today. The two bolts at each end of the yard takes the main shear loads, and the two tubes are firmly held together by the lashing of the halyard blocks and by that stitched-on PVC mast-padding, so the choice of glue is hardly critical, me thinks.

Arne

*) No I would not! I would rather downsize than upsize if were dumb enough to sell Ingeborg.

Thank you Arne. Your informative writings are, as always, a great inspiration and encouragement. (I must also offer the same thanks to David T and Slieve.)

We are very lucky.

Accepted!

(..which lets me pour a dram of turbo-charged potatoes and drink to your health  -  ok, to mine as well, and to the rest of you, while I am at it...)

Cheers!
Arne

Anonymous wrote:

Conclusion:

Until the opposite has been proven, I claim that the Johanna-style version of the HM-rig, sewn with camber in all the panels, assembled in the barrel-only fashion and using Amateur Method B, will be as fast as any other JR with 3D panels formed by broad-seam, shelf foot or tucks, and with the same mast height, (though it may not look as nice). Moreover, I claim that it will be so at any state of reefing. I may well be proven wrong on this, but I no longer buy armchair claims.

Stavanger, 31th July 2018,

Arne Kverneland

That would be a valid and justifiable claim, I think. Would you agree, Arne?

Haha, in your dreams, David ;-) ! I have already moderated that write-up sufficiently in that PS, yesterday.

However, just as I defend my right to do things my way, I’ll defend anyone’s right to do things theirs. One may even express differing opinions about other people’s rigs and their work, but it depends how it is being done.

What I wonder about is how  ‘right on’  your criticisms are. You, (..or even I, mostly...) may call it straight talk, but sometimes, from the outside, these criticisms or feedbacks neither look nice nor encouraging.

This is my point, and firm opinion:

All criticisms (i.e. expression of differing opinions) on this site should be encouraging, even when we need to air disagreement.

The ‘straight talk’ version of criticism can easily be interpreted as patronising.

And frankly, David, your straight talk is sometimes too straight, even to me.

Cheers, Arne