Yes,

I tried moving the old sail as much forward as possible. This included taking off the topmost panel to get a lower-angled yard which in turn made it possible to move the sail even further (maybe about 60 cm of sail in front of the mast).

The sailing abilities seemed to get a bit better balance-wise, but at the same time the sail went so far forward that the camber was too badly destroyed in the sb tack. 

Also, the problem with sail area vs drive remained, of course.

I also had a transom-hung auxiliary rudder along the main rudder to counter the weather helm. Didn't help as much as I thought.

Thanks Graeme and David,

the problem is/was the unknown reason for excess weather helm.

The initial Arne-type sail and mast position was consulted by Arne himself, for which I'm most grateful.

However, the calculation/estimate made with the sidewiev of the hull didn't work in real life - at least no with my sailing style and sailing waters.  Sometimes real life just doesn't work like one assumes, and we have to accept it.

Of course, the reason might somehow be me all along.

Another reason for going to SJR , shelf-foot method and more camber is the lack of drive vs sail area. I had consistent problems with too much heeling (and thus even more weather helm) even in moderate conditions, while more reefing would drop the drive too low to sail against waves with my 1 500 kg boat.

I will adress this with more camber on the upper panels and probably making the upper panels smaller.

The Galion 22 hull has an interesting shape with a very light and sharp bow plus quite a wide stern, which on the other hand is mostly "hanging in the air" while the boat is not heeling or not going very fast.  

Maybe you can get an idea on the photo here (not my boat).

The bermudan rig of the Galion 22 has a very big, deck-sweeping genoa as a standard. I don't know how the CE of the genoa works in the big picture compared to a 110% jib for example.

One of my problems might be the mast placing too much forward. Because of the narrow and low-boyant bow, the pressure of the wind+sail might push the bow bown, which in turn might make the stern + rudder act in a different way than planned by Ian Hannay.

But I will not begin a mast-moving procedure with a new mast step + partners, unless I simply have no other option. I might have to do this later, but sewing a sail is much easier - especially when one considers the camber/panel size issues mentioned earlier.

Hi Jami,  

I think that how much jiblet area you can put forward of your existing mast position is dependent very much on where the final CE of the SJR sail versus the balance of the hull and existing position of the mast is going to be.  CE too far aft, weather helm. CE too far forward. lee helm

As regards SJR sail "balance", Slieve's original recommendation, if I recall correctly, was to leave a 6% of chord length split between jiblet and main panels with a maximum of 33% of chord length forward of the centreline of the mast leaving a maximum of 27% of chord length for the jiblets.     

This was with a mast in the optimum position for an SJR sail and was the maximum he felt was good for positive feathering of the sail.   

In your case, with the mast position optimised for an Arne-style sail and likely well forward of the optimum position for an SJR sail,  this is going to change how much jiblet area you can have. Likely less jiblet chord length forward of the mast.

I suggest you look again at how you calculated the CLR and position of the original conversion and mast position, which seems to have gone wrong for you, in order to double check again why it went wrong.  You need to satisfy yourself about why this happened before proceeding with any cutting and sewing, I think.  

Hopefully others with more experience, like Arne and Slieve himself, who understands the rig better than any of us and others with practical engineering knowledge of Junk CE calculation will chip in and help.  

Try and determine the correct position of the hull CLR first which will determine the placement of the CE of the sail with regards to that hull balance before cutting and sewing a new sail. Then adjust the jiblet area forward of the mast to accommodate that. 

Reading the original PBO test, they did mention that the boat did have weather helm, but not uncontrollable and liked to be sailed flat.  

Hope this is of some use to your thought process.

Regards,  Dave D.

If I recall, there was a discussion about how to calculate the balance right on a SJR. But I don’t remember the ”right” way...

300 cm main, 20 cm gap, 80 cm jiblets on a 13 cm mast. Something around 23% ?

Ok folks, we've started again - but not from scratch (phew.)

I have sold the sail and started a new one. Because of the balance issues and the lack of drive vs sail area, I'm going for a SJR this time.

However, I'll have less balance than Slieve suggests, because the mast will stay as it is and I don't want to go from too much weather helm to the other extreme.

I have drawn patterns for 800mm jiblets and 3000mm mains, which means 200mm gap with my 4000mm battens. The camber drawn is 11% for the jiblets and 8% for the mains. I will probably drop this on the upper panels.

I'll use 45 degree shelf-foot method on both parts, including the mains.

The sewing is about to start in a week or so. 

I will also update my DIY self steering system to a pendulum system (as per David Tyler's plans) and not use an aux rudder (which will be tuned to be the pendulum). The question of making a new rudder is still in consideration.