I have not read Mr Hartley's comments, but the disaster he may be referring to was the boat that Dr David Lewis lost off Great Barrier Island in the late 90s (Hartley Fijian design).  David originally fitted a timber foremast of poor quality timber that broke.  He also stayed it, possibly because of its poor quality (the mainmast was unstayed), but it still broke.  I wrote to him, advising against staying, as the poor angle of the shrouds would do little more than add compression loads to the mast. He then replaced this mast with a steel pole, once again staying it.  It was this mast that caused the accident the vessel then suffered.  50 miles east of Great Barrier Island, the mast broke out of its step and punched a hole through the hull, sinking the vessel.  Fortunately the crew were rescued from their life-raft several hours later. 

The cause of this accident appeared to be a combination of using stays and a poorly constructed mast-step.  The unstayed mainmast carried a much larger sail and had no structural difficulties.  If you are going to stay any mast, the angle of the shrouds needs to be at least 10 degrees. 

Yacht designers don't like builders modifying their plans, especially making structural modifications without ratification from the designer.  This is understandable, given some of the poor results I have observed, but if the changes are done by an experienced builder, based on good engineering practices, there is no doubt a successful junk rig conversion can be made.

Hi Hans, 

I have helped build two ferro cement hulls and can confirm the comments made to date. The major factor in quality is the plastering and it must be done by pushing the plaster through from one side until it comes out on the other and then fairing it off. the ones I helped on pushed the plaster from the inside out and then skimmed and faired the outer surface. They also epoxy coated the hulls after the plaster cured. Both boats have lasted well and suffered no hull problems in the time I knew them. 

As far as using a free standing rig is concerned I would have no qualms about using it on a ferro hull. The stresses are so much less than for a stayed rig but they are in different locations so care must be taken to reinforce the hull appropriately for the stresses produced by the free standing masts.

All the best in your search for a boat.

David

There is no reason why junk rig cannot be successfully fitted to a ferro-cement hull.  I worked for several years in a yard that built ferro boats and know the medium well.  While I would not build a ferro hull now (it would be just as cheap, and quicker these days to build a multi-chined steel hull), a well-built ferro boat is strong and seaworthy and second-hand ones are often quite cheap and require minimal maintenance.  Ideally, you want to know something about its construction, both what sort of armature (reinforcing) was used and how the hull was cured etc.  A good boat should have some documentation about this.  On the other hand, if the boat is 30 years old, has done some sailing and is still looking good, it is probably ok!   The biggest challenge, though not insurmountable, would be to secure the mast step/s firmly to the hull, as you cannot weld, glue or bolt them through the hull.  However, a good ferro boat will have substantial floors and you can bolt in a welded steel structure between two floors that will be perfectly adequate.  The partners offer no particular challenge - proceed as you would with any other design.  Good luck!

I have just been on the Hartley and Brooks website looking at the pictures in the Hartley owners gallery in the section ferrocement boats, power and sail boats. Picture No. 122 on page 11 appears to be the same as the one containing the adverse comments. How strange.

Hi, and Happy New Year from a pretty fresh member from Norway.

My wife and I are pretty new to sailing, but we share a dream of getting a boat to retire on and become full time liveaboard cruisers in some years. I am currently trying to research to the best of my abilities how we can make it happen, given our ramifications. That includes reading the classics like Colvin's Cruising as a way of life, and Hasler, McLeod's Practical Junk Rig, as well as other litterature, and searching the web for any useful information that can help us make our dream come through. That's how I ended up becoming a member of the JRA.

I think we have more or less settled for the chambered junk sails as our favourite option for rigging. From the info on this site the advantages seem obvious and the disadvantages, at least for our intended use, seem negligible. I have kind of fallen in love with the split junk rig, which based on this forum seems to have lessened the few disadvantages even further. And I think it looks good too. What's not to like? ;)

During my meanderings on the Internet trying to find out more about other things like hulls and hull materials I came across this site: http://www.ferrocement.org/. It is run by Hartley & Brooks and seems to give pretty good info on ferrocement as a hull material. If the info holds true a ferro boat may not be as bad an idea as a lot of people claim it is.

However there was one piece of information there that made me puzzled. On the bottom of the page, http://www.ferrocement.org/pig.html, showing some examples of pitfalls to avoid there was a picture of a very nice looking Hartley converted to a junk rig schooner, with the statement:

" 'Junk'..not just the rig !! a disaster waiting to happen. An amateur has fitted unstayed masts in a hull originally designed by Hartley's for stayed masts, and has the audacity to still call it a Hartley !!"

Is he really just biased or mad because someone "messed with the artwork of Hartley & Brooks" or is there an actual danger connected to fitting unstayed masts to a hull designed for stayed masts? Are there any factors that can make a hull like that not suited for unstayed masts? If so, what are they? I have so far been under the impression that you could fit unstayed masts to virtually any hull, given you used your brain and made the right reinforcements.

I hope I'm not reiterating something that has already been answered. If so, would someone please point me to the right thread?

Cheers.

Hans Jørgen