It works, and very stately she looks too...  No doubt who the real star is in that video.

A quick question - what is the line that looks like a mini kicking strap?

Congratulations, Arne!

Mark

Annie,

maybe I have grown to be a half-decent helmsman after all these years, but I think it is more the boat than the man this time. When I had Johanna, I sailed a couple of times in company with a Nordic Folkboat. When close-hauled, the same thing happened: The Folkboat sailed 2-4° (I just guess) higher, while Johanna drifted to leeward.

Last year, during the first trial sails of Ingeborg, she went well, but not that well. Then I thought that I would have a hard time with keeping up with that Folkboat. I must have under-estimated the effect of the moderately foul bottom she had then. Now, after slipping, she really flies in light winds so I guess she and the Folkboat will be quite equal.

My reasoning behind choosing an IF as a JR project was that I knew about their pointing ability. All they needed was a bigger rig for light winds to overcome the higher wetted surface. Ingeborg’s JR area is the same as the IF with Genoa 1, so is not extreme in any way.

There is another thing to consider  -  the sheeting and twist.
Ingeborg has been given the same ‘Johanna sheeting’ as my previous boats (see Junk Rig for Beginners, p.5). This has a very good anti-twist effect. As can be seen on the photos, there is just that little bit twist in her sail, both when sailing upwind and downwind. In fact, when sailing close-hauled, with full sail set, I use to monitor the leech telltale of the upper panel. This indicates separation a moment before the others. Keeping the whole sail working, is in my view important to get the best out of a sail.
The Johanna sheeting takes up quite some room so if there simply is not enough of it, I would split the sheet in an upper and lower part. I think one would be paid back handsomely in performance for the extra complexity of handling two sheet tails, in particular when the sail is reefed.

Arne

On the photo below you can see how I tame the long sheet bundle on Ingeborg: A rope loop is lying ready on the side deck so as soon as the sail has been dropped, I clip it around the bundle.

Photo section 5

Arne Kverneland wrote: 

 Still, we gained on her quite easily and soon we were about to overtake her, when we split up.

I've had that happen to me - some people really don't like being overtaken by a junk!

The Marieholm IF,

together with a 35sqm cambered panel JR,
plus fresh antifouling  -
 is a seriously good combination.

Typical!

During all the years I had my Alo 28, Johanna, I hardly spotted another Alo. Only yesterday, as I and a mate had just taken out Ingeborg for a spin, did an Alo pass us in the opposite direction. She was tacking her way upwind and that was simply an irresistible temptation to us, so we turned around. The Alo already had over 100m lead. Still, we gained on her quite easily and soon we were about to overtake her, when we split up. It appeared that the speed through the water was very similar (between 4 and 5 kts, wind about F3), but Ingeborg simply tacked well inside the other boat. I roughly assessed the difference in pointing angle to be between 3 and 5°. The Alo was simply drifting to leeward. So what was wrong with her then? Nothing I could spot. The sails were not old rags  -  quite the opposite: The mainsail was a tri-radial, full-length-batten job, no less, and the jib was one of these tall narrow 100% jibs, perfectly suited for the job that day. The whole ship looked very smart.

I put this observation in the heap of hints I have got recently, and I dare conclude now:

The Marieholm IF,
together with a 35sqm cambered panel JR,
plus fresh antifouling  -
 is a seriously good combination.

Cheers, Arne

PS:
Before we went back to the berth, my crew jumped ashore with my camera. With me scooting back and forth on the bay, he took over fifty photos, plus a little video clip. Here are a few of them.

Scott,
yes, that is how I tension the sail along the battens; with lashings. On Johanna’s blue sail (2002), I went in the other direction. After sailing her for a while, I slackened the sail about 1,7% along the battens to aid bulging. This lead to deeper camber   -  and more “smiling wrinkles” along the battens. I felt that that sail became more powerful ( but no guarantees).

 When making a copy of Johanna’s sail for Edmond Dantes (2012), I added more round along each panel and then again added more tension (not extreme) along the battens. I never got along to measure the resulting camber, but it looked good. When making Frøken Sørensen’s sail (2013), I used my Chain Calculator and aimed for 9% camber, but thanks to stretching this sail too along the battens, the resulting camber ended on 8%. Actually that was what I wanted, and I again got this trapeze-like vertical curve.

So what is best? I doubt if there is much difference. However, I guess I now prefer to have a bit tension to reduce the amount of wrinkles along the battens. I also like the look of the more trapeze-like vertical curve in each panel.

Remember, my barrel only method is a compromise. If you are a better craftsman and generally in the tidy league, you may get the cambered panels to set better if you insert about three (false or true) broadseams along the rounded curves before assembling the sail, panel by panel. That should remove the wrinkles and most probably not do damage to the main camber.

Slieve McGalliard has described how to do that.

I am way too lazy to bother. My main focus with respect to creases is to avoid the big diagonal, camber-robbing ones.

Arne

PS:
Below is a couple of photos from yesterday of Ingeborg’s sail, sailing close-hauled on the mast-to-weather tack. See captions.
PPS:
We are enjoying a real Indian Summer here now, so I am glad I am “back in the saddle” again.