Galion 22 conversion

<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   5   ...   Next >  Last >> 
  • 30 Aug 2019 12:55
    Reply # 7856514 on 7856491
    Just a thought (in my limited experience), are you over sheeting?

    That, too - but I have learned to stay away from this. The problem remains.

  • 30 Aug 2019 12:30
    Reply # 7856491 on 5070195

    I recall from my windsurfing days, that even the storm sail was better with a fair bit of curve, far more so than flattening a larger sail. The flat sail on the Coromandel pulls well when reefed, as there is some belly to the top panel.

    Just a thought (in my limited experience), are you over sheeting?

    Last modified: 30 Aug 2019 12:32 | Anonymous member
  • 29 Aug 2019 13:45
    Reply # 7854930 on 5070195

    Yep, they have been made with an aim of 6/4/2%.

    I seem to have to use 3-4 panels for enough drive in winds that would "sailareawise" require reefing to 2 (or 1) panels.

    And just a reminder: The boat sailed happily in a strong wind without a mainsail, only a tiny storm jib  (not a reefed genoa, as someone seemed to think).

    Last modified: 29 Aug 2019 14:30 | Anonymous member
  • 29 Aug 2019 13:35
    Reply # 7854920 on 5070195
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    The 3-panel top sections I have (had) on my last three boats have been given a round from this simple rule of thumb:
    With 8% camber in the lower panels, I cut the top panel with ¼ or 1/5 of the round used in the lower panel. In the next panel, I double the round of that in the top panel. In panel no. 3 I either use 2/3 the round of the lower panels, or I calculate the round to give 6% camber. The last method is used in high-AR sails where panel 3 is close to the parallelogram shape. Note that I often use asymmetric round in panel 3, that is with less round at the upper edge and more in the lower edge. This is to make it fit better with its adjacent panels. On the two upper panels, I let the max-round point sit at the middle of the yard and battens. My experience when sailing only 3-up is that the sail is still remarkably powerful.

    Jami, if your 3-panel top section feels quite lame in a breeze, it might be that it is at the flat side. However, from the YouTube clips, it looks ok.


  • 29 Aug 2019 13:03
    Reply # 7854876 on 5070195

    In fact, panels 4-6 are alike and have aimed camber of 8%.

    The ”not enough drive vs sail area” problem lies on the top three panels, which are not exchangeable with anything else.

    Last modified: 29 Aug 2019 13:04 | Anonymous member
  • 29 Aug 2019 12:06
    Reply # 7854833 on 5070195


    Selling the sail means starting from scratch again with no guarantee that whatever you build will work either.

    But as your sail is made of individual panels with, I presume, more camber in the lower panels, could you swap one of the lower (higher camber?) parallelogram panels to the top of the parallelogram to save you doing any more sewing for the moment and see if that helps .  

    I know it's a fair bit of work to swap a couple of the panels around on the rig, but it's a lot less work (and cost) than removing all the panels, building a whole new sail and fitting them and still maybe not solving your problem.  

    As the hull seems to be quite a good one and you like the boat, I think the above is at least worth a try. 

    Dave D. 

  • 29 Aug 2019 11:56
    Reply # 7854828 on 5070195

    Thanks David,

    This is indeed the conclusion I have come to - regardless of whether I should also make a new rudder or not: more drive in the upper panels, and possibly making them a bit smaller, too. If I could also have a bit shorter boom/chord length as a bonus, that would be nice.

    So the question remains: do I make new upper panels (which is doable, hence the individual panels) or just sell the sail and start anew?

    PS. I have read the PBO test, it was one of the reasons I chose Galion when one came available.

  • 29 Aug 2019 11:45
    Reply # 7854808 on 5070195

    Hi, Jami,

    I knew I had a PBO (March 2008 Practical Boat Owner) test of a Galion 22 somewhere.  I'll try to send you on a copy of the report when I get more time.  

    Quoting from the report;

    "For our sail, we picked a day when it was gusting up to 20 knots, prompting Jim to drop a slab in the mainsail".

    "He tends to reef if conditions are marginal on the basis that the helm can otherwise get heavy, but while the tiller had a firm feel, it only exerted any appreciable pull if we let the gunwale got close to the water".

    "It would undoubtedly feel lighter if the tiller were a little longer.  It's on the short side at 0.7M/2ft 4in. to save some space in the cockpit."  

    They concluded that overall, it was a great little yacht for its size.  

    So it seems that heeling the gunwale into the water is going to introduce weather helm and you have shown yourself, that the Galion can be steered easily simply by heeling even slightly to one side or the other. (More heel, more weather helm) Also, that the boat went well to windward with just a scrap of bermudan genoa, (and no mainsail?) which wouldn't have created a huge heeling force. 

    You talked of a lack of drive to windward with the Junk Rig when reefed. As it drove quite well with just the scrap of Genoa, maybe your sail needs  a little more camber in the upper panels  so when reefed down then, you would still have the power from fuller camber  while lowering the Centre of Effort and reducing the heeling effect which will help reduce the weather helm, keeping your rudder straighter and reducing drag from it as well.    

    A bigger rudder and longer tiller (I'm not saying they're a bad idea) will physically help you to keep it straight while heeled and reduce the load on you, but what about the load on the boat?  . Physically overcoming forces with extra leverage might overload the rudder fittings.

    Reducing heeling and more camber in your upper panels for more forward drive when reefed might be the answer.

    PS;  I've wondered about this.  Reefing reduces sail area and lowers the C of E and in itself would reduce heeling.  Could you then get away with more camber in the upper panels to provide the drive you need as the sail reduction will of itself reduce heeling?

    But with less camber in upper panels normally recommended to allow for different wind-speeds and direction at the top of the mast when under full sail, is it a case of having to compromise, with the Junk Rig, between correct camber under full sail and under reefed sail? 

    Not sure the above is of any help at all.  

    Dave D. 

    Last modified: 29 Aug 2019 11:56 | Anonymous member
  • 29 Aug 2019 09:39
    Reply # 7854715 on 5070195
    Anonymous member (Administrator)


    I must say I struggle with understanding this. My first boat with a JR, the 1400kg  Albin Viggen, Malena, had a 32sqm JR on a 9.4m tall wooden mast. She needed a reef early, and that  (70kg?) wooden mast surely could be felt, but she coped quite well, although she struggled in a headwind against a short fjord chop (but so she did with a BR).

    The vertical position of the Galion’s CE may be one panel-height above that of the original BR, but a reef should restore that.

    Anyway, on my Malena I used to reef at around 25° heel, my 29’ Johanna at about 30°+ and my present IF, Ingeborg at 25-30°. Malena was reefed due to rising weather helm and bad leeway, Johanna mainly due to discomfort and leeway, and my Ingeborg mainly due to rising weather helm (tiller force more than rudder angle).

    The Bermuda sloop has one advantage: On may reef the mainsail before the jib, and thus move the CE forward.

    The great American boat-designer and builder, Nathanael Herreshof, designed a few cat yawls for cruising. The yawl no doubt lets one off-load the rudder if correctly designed and used.

    I now fear that the installation of a high-balance JR only will help you a bit. Only a big rudder will let you hang on to full sail (without needing a big rudder angle) until 20 – 25° heel, which is needed to achieve the needed drive against the wind and head-sea. Such a big hi-AR rudder also acts as a cb. and will thus reduce leeway.

    What have I missed?


    Last modified: 29 Aug 2019 09:49 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 29 Aug 2019 06:59
    Reply # 7854582 on 5070195


    the rig is like you have drawn, although I have changed the "drop-off" panel from time to time to see the differences. Sometimes I have left the bottom panel away like in your diagram, sometimes the top panel (to get a lower yard angle and the possibility of more balance).

    With the boat sailing to windward without much heel, the tiller force is not that high. We have to remember, though, that I have installed the aux-rudder, which has helped.

    And no lee-helm in any situation, absolutely none - not even when I have pushed the balance to the extreme with the lower yard.

    Considering the balance with BR, the heeling-induced weather helm was present, too. I have mentioned this in the early posts, and this was also one of the reasons for setting the mast this much forward in the first place.

    With the CE at the same position with JR and BR, the vertical position is higher with JR, right? This should induce more heeling compared to the SA in use?

    To me it seems more and more like a problem of drive vs heeling.

    Last modified: 29 Aug 2019 07:07 | Anonymous member
<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   5   ...   Next >  Last >> 
       " ...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