Flat Sails are Still Okay

  • 26 May 2011 01:28
    Reply # 601611 on 594527
    What David, you planing to take Tystie to the Movies? :-)
  • 25 May 2011 23:53
    Reply # 601447 on 594527
    The double portion of my wingsails is fastened back the main part of the sail with Velcro. I'd thought of zips, but it never occurred to me to use buttons. Thank you, Kurt , a whole new set of possibilities opens up!
  • 25 May 2011 19:46
    Reply # 601295 on 601043
    Alan "Maddog!" MacBride wrote:
    Kurt Jon Ulmer wrote:Great comments, everybody. Thanks.

    Now, how can I convince the world that buttons are better than Velcro (TM)?
    (only kidding...)

    KJU

    They make less noise at the movies?

    And they don't gather fluff.
  • 25 May 2011 14:10
    Reply # 601043 on 600965
    Deleted user
    Kurt Jon Ulmer wrote:Great comments, everybody. Thanks.

    Now, how can I convince the world that buttons are better than Velcro (TM)?
    (only kidding...)

    KJU

    They make less noise at the movies?
  • 25 May 2011 10:28
    Reply # 600965 on 594527
    Great comments, everybody. Thanks.

    Now, how can I convince the world that buttons are better than Velcro (TM)?
    (only kidding...)

    KJU
  • 25 May 2011 01:01
    Reply # 600564 on 594527
    Yes, flat sails are okay... but so are cambered sails and so for that matter are softwings.....

    The wonderful thing about the junk rig.... As long as you get your basic framework right (battens, sheets, control lines) you will have a rig that is simple to handle, easy and quick to reef... and that is why (most of us) have put junk rigs on our boats.

    Thats the beauty of it all, if you like it super simple and flat, you can have it. If you have the time and abilities you can make a softwing. Everyone can choice according to their temperament, inclination and/or there abilities/depth of pocket.

    None is better or worse than the other, just what suits you and your abilities. And if you don't like it. You can change it.
  • 25 May 2011 00:42
    Reply # 600533 on 600529
    Annie Hill wrote:I think that what Kurt is saying is 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it.'  Pete - an inveterate (and maddening!) tinkerer once took scissors and sewing machine to our gorgeous green sails and inserted shape a la Arne.  It didn't seem to make much difference.  We took out the battens, just to see what happened.  It didn't seem to make much difference.  We had sailed tens of thousands of miles in the boat by then  and quite a lot either without engine, or choosing not to use it (average use 25 hrs per 10 000 miles).  We took out the shape and carried on as before.

    'Fantail' has a slippery hull and is fairly light displacement.  In a flat sea she will sail herself close-hauled, but if I go down to the galley to make some coffee, I have to move slowly and carefully so that she doesn't shy from the sudden adjustment in trim.  'Badger' used to sail herself to windward regardless of how many were on board and what they were up to.  From this I infer that a sensitive hull will respond more noticeably to tweaking.

    Kurt is not only content but actively happy and appreciative of his simple rig.  What more could anyone wish for?
    Yup.
    Flat Sails are Still ... Okay.
    But seriously: I hope the JRA will continue to be very broadly based, with members' boats ranging from small dinghies to small ships, and with their rigs ranging from bedsheets and bamboos to hi-tech, go-faster "boys-toys".


    Last modified: 25 May 2011 00:59 | Anonymous member
  • 25 May 2011 00:38
    Reply # 600529 on 594527
    I think that what Kurt is saying is 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it.'  Pete - an inveterate (and maddening!) tinkerer once took scissors and sewing machine to our gorgeous green sails and inserted shape a la Arne.  It didn't seem to make much difference.  We took out the battens, just to see what happened.  It didn't seem to make much difference.  We had sailed tens of thousands of miles in the boat by then  and quite a lot either without engine, or choosing not to use it (average use 25 hrs per 10 000 miles).  We took out the shape and carried on as before.

    'Fantail' has a slippery hull and is fairly light displacement.  In a flat sea she will sail herself close-hauled, but if I go down to the galley to make some coffee, I have to move slowly and carefully so that she doesn't shy from the sudden adjustment in trim.  'Badger' used to sail herself to windward regardless of how many were on board and what they were up to.  From this I infer that a sensitive hull will respond more noticeably to tweaking.

    Kurt is not only content but actively happy and appreciative of his simple rig.  What more could anyone wish for?
  • 24 May 2011 02:39
    Reply # 599596 on 599266
    Kurt Jon Ulmer wrote:Well Paul,

    Actually, there's nothing that I would rather not have pointed out. I'm not religious about any flat this or traditional that. 

    But, if people start to get the impression that you need a machine shop and engineering calculator to create a proper junk rig, we will have allowed a barrier, when the tradition of junk rigs has been to enable rather than discourage. Colvin is quoted as saying something like, "How bad would [sails] have to be, not to work at all?" Flat junk sails work 'Okay' I reckon.

    I'm not against cambered junk sails or wingsails or innovation or racing. I just like to promote a few of the essential timeless qualities of junk rigs: inexpensive, robust, patchable,  easily-designed, forgiving, simple, satisfactory-if-not-optimum, durable, home-made, beautiful, novel... and reefed in ten seconds. Did I mention inexpensive?

    The natural distribution of strain that I mentioned first in this discussion, is one reason the rig survived centuries in China, and decades of Hasler & McLeod's working-out in Britain. I'm just choosing not to mess with the basics, as I come to appreciate them.

    I look up at our slightly-curving blue sails with awe, just from knowing that we created them ourselves on the fire hall floor, they're good enough, they cost very little, they're the product of a long long line of creative thought on simple principles, plus I got to add my own particular... wrinkles, too.

    Regards,
    Kurt

    Dear Kurt,

    Sorry (only half :-) but I could not resist yanking your chain (you did start this thread after all). Flat sails are the simplest form of junk sail and I have no argument with that. But putting shape into a sail does not need to be in anyway complicated nor need it add much more time to the making of the sail. At the simplest level, use Vincent Reddish's methods. Cheap, simple and very low cost. You do not even need a tape measure as every thing is based on ratios but an ability to do multiplication would be handy (as would a tape measure). If you do not know of Vincent Reddish, check out the NL's.

    Next up would be Arn's methods. Super easy and very basic sail making. If you cannot build a cambered sail using Arne's methods and instructions( see http://www.junkrigassociation.org/arne),  you probably cannot build a flat sail either.

    Most complex would be the shelf foot method and various other broad seaming methods and even here, David Tyler has written up a simple method in the NL's.

    What I am saying is that a cambered sail can be as complicated or as simple as you want to make it. The choice is up to the individual concerned.

    However that is for cambered sails. So far, the above does not apply to softwings (at least the kind that are effective). They are indeed difficult, complex and time consuming to make and if you are making the type that David and I have made, you do need reasonable sailmaking skills and also good workshop skills. However I am not advocating that everyone should build softwings, only pionting out the cambered sails are neither terribly difficult nor very much more time consuming than ordinary flat sails. I do however believe that the extra effort that is required for a cambered sail is well rewarded.
  • 23 May 2011 22:57
    Reply # 599266 on 594527
    Well Paul,

    Actually, there's nothing that I would rather not have pointed out. I'm not religious about any flat this or traditional that. 

    But, if people start to get the impression that you need a machine shop and engineering calculator to create a proper junk rig, we will have allowed a barrier, when the tradition of junk rigs has been to enable rather than discourage. Colvin is quoted as saying something like, "How bad would [sails] have to be, not to work at all?" Flat junk sails work 'Okay' I reckon.

    I'm not against cambered junk sails or wingsails or innovation or racing. I just like to promote a few of the essential timeless qualities of junk rigs: inexpensive, robust, patchable,  easily-designed, forgiving, simple, satisfactory-if-not-optimum, durable, home-made, beautiful, novel... and reefed in ten seconds. Did I mention inexpensive?

    The natural distribution of strain that I mentioned first in this discussion, is one reason the rig survived centuries in China, and decades of Hasler & McLeod's working-out in Britain. I'm just choosing not to mess with the basics, as I come to appreciate them.

    I look up at our slightly-curving blue sails with awe, just from knowing that we created them ourselves on the fire hall floor, they're good enough, they cost very little, they're the product of a long long line of creative thought on simple principles, plus I got to add my own particular... wrinkles, too.

    Regards,
    Kurt

       " ...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