Re: Bolger Chinese Gaff?
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
racing dinghies with stressed full batten rigs, the experts always
reckoned the cut of the sail determined the shape more than the
battens. I don't believe battens on large keelboats are shaped?
shorter, that compensates to some extent. I never asked for battens,
they just came.
DonB
> --- dbaldnz <oink@p...> wrote:No, they are the same section all the way. Actually, when we were
> > My sail came from the sailmaker
> > with fibreglass battens.
>
> Did your sailmaker make the
> fiberglass battens stiffer
> at the leach and more flexible
> at the 'belly' towards the luff?
racing dinghies with stressed full batten rigs, the experts always
reckoned the cut of the sail determined the shape more than the
battens. I don't believe battens on large keelboats are shaped?
> Are you happy with the 'shape'Don't know....have not got to the water yet.
> of your sail?
>No, they are the same section. I guess because it is a little
> Is the top 'storm' batten stiffer
> than the bottom 'light air' batten?
shorter, that compensates to some extent. I never asked for battens,
they just came.
DonB
--- dbaldnz <oink@...> wrote:
fiberglass battens stiffer
at the leach and more flexible
at the 'belly' towards the luff?
Are you happy with the 'shape'
of your sail?
Is the top 'storm' batten stiffer
than the bottom 'light air' batten?
> My sail came from the sailmakerDid your sailmaker make the
> with fibreglass battens.
fiberglass battens stiffer
at the leach and more flexible
at the 'belly' towards the luff?
Are you happy with the 'shape'
of your sail?
Is the top 'storm' batten stiffer
than the bottom 'light air' batten?
--- sctree <sctree@...> wrote:
The 2x-- D.Fir gets delivered from
Oregon to my local Home Depot,
jucy green and cheap. 95% of it has
too many knots, but if you shop
frequently you can cull out the nice
pieces.
Thinking ahead to another boat, I
wonder if I can learn and succeed
at getting green Doug Fir to steam
bend into ribs. Green oak is
unavailable in California.
> Go buy a green Dougfir 2x- and<grin> Look in the rafters of my shop!
> rip out rough battens
> now so it will air dry
> by the time you need it.
The 2x-- D.Fir gets delivered from
Oregon to my local Home Depot,
jucy green and cheap. 95% of it has
too many knots, but if you shop
frequently you can cull out the nice
pieces.
Thinking ahead to another boat, I
wonder if I can learn and succeed
at getting green Doug Fir to steam
bend into ribs. Green oak is
unavailable in California.
My sail came from the sailmaker with fibreglass battens. Heaven
knows how they will stand up to it. The weak point is probably at
the luff, where I have bolted them through the jaws.
DonB
knows how they will stand up to it. The weak point is probably at
the luff, where I have bolted them through the jaws.
DonB
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, sctree <sctree@d...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > The only realisticly economical woods
> > I have available are D.Fir and Redwood.
>
> Redwood is too brittle. Dougfir would work great if not kiln
dried. Go
> buy a green Dougfir 2x- and rip out rough battens now so it will
air dry
> by the time you need it.
>
> Another choice sometimes available in CA is local grown, air
dried,
> Black Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia). I have some 1/8" thick, 1"
wide
> strips that I can bend to a circle with a one foot radius without
> snapping, yet with 3/16" thick by 1" wide I can only deflect a 48"
long
> piece about an inch out of alignment. Nothing longer than 4'
around here
> lately, but you might want to keep and eye out... There was some
nice
> long planks at JapanWoodworker in Alameda last time I was up
there....
>
> Rick-
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>Redwood is too brittle. Dougfir would work great if not kiln dried. Go
>
> The only realisticly economical woods
> I have available are D.Fir and Redwood.
buy a green Dougfir 2x- and rip out rough battens now so it will air dry
by the time you need it.
Another choice sometimes available in CA is local grown, air dried,
Black Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia). I have some 1/8" thick, 1" wide
strips that I can bend to a circle with a one foot radius without
snapping, yet with 3/16" thick by 1" wide I can only deflect a 48" long
piece about an inch out of alignment. Nothing longer than 4' around here
lately, but you might want to keep and eye out... There was some nice
long planks at JapanWoodworker in Alameda last time I was up there....
Rick-
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> sail with a modern aerodynamic shape,Another reason, especially in the case
> and control over twist (add'l > sheets).
of the Mirco Navigator, is the ability
to handle the sails, and to reef the
sails without going out on deck...
[the Micro Navigator essentially does
not have any 'deck'].
>I guess I am just trying to understand103 Rigs is pretty clear on this is it not? A "traditional" looking
>what PB&F were thinking when they
>invented this rig. The next question,
>is does this rig work?
sail with a modern aerodynamic shape, and control over twist (add'l
sheets).
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
Hi Bruce
"...does this rig work?"
Well, yes.
Does it work sufficiently better than the standard sprit-boomed l.o.m. to
justify the extra work and expense? A side by side comparison would be
needed, no? We simply have not done enough sailing yet for me to make any
pretence of authority. It is certainly both flexible and good fun.
At this point, we've had five or five and a half knots [in other words,
approaching 'hull speed'] between broad and close reaching under full sail,
and between beam reach and dead downwind fully reefed. Some of that has been
'exciting' sailing. It is certainly possible to sail the rig as a Gaffer,
i.e. without handling the upper sheets beyond the bare requirement of
keeping them from fouling. My impression is that the strains imposed are
determined by the skipper. At no point could I discern a heavy strain on
either upper vang/sheet. I've been letting the upper sheets run loose until
the main sheet is where I want it, then cleating the uppers through a home
made jammer from which they can pull free under excessive strain. They've
held the leech position I set without freeing from the jammer. Again, this
is subjective, but I would say that there is no significant 'compressive'
load on the battens [meaning load on the batten from leech to luff].
IIRC the Navigator mizzen is about the same size at the partners as the
standard l.o.m. rig, and was specified as a standard untapered pipe for
convenience. An increase in rigidity over the standard mast would be
necessary of course. Even light loads on the upper sheet/vang would bend the
highly tapered standard mast, seriously distorting the mizzen sail shape.
cheers
Derek
"...does this rig work?"
Well, yes.
Does it work sufficiently better than the standard sprit-boomed l.o.m. to
justify the extra work and expense? A side by side comparison would be
needed, no? We simply have not done enough sailing yet for me to make any
pretence of authority. It is certainly both flexible and good fun.
At this point, we've had five or five and a half knots [in other words,
approaching 'hull speed'] between broad and close reaching under full sail,
and between beam reach and dead downwind fully reefed. Some of that has been
'exciting' sailing. It is certainly possible to sail the rig as a Gaffer,
i.e. without handling the upper sheets beyond the bare requirement of
keeping them from fouling. My impression is that the strains imposed are
determined by the skipper. At no point could I discern a heavy strain on
either upper vang/sheet. I've been letting the upper sheets run loose until
the main sheet is where I want it, then cleating the uppers through a home
made jammer from which they can pull free under excessive strain. They've
held the leech position I set without freeing from the jammer. Again, this
is subjective, but I would say that there is no significant 'compressive'
load on the battens [meaning load on the batten from leech to luff].
IIRC the Navigator mizzen is about the same size at the partners as the
standard l.o.m. rig, and was specified as a standard untapered pipe for
convenience. An increase in rigidity over the standard mast would be
necessary of course. Even light loads on the upper sheet/vang would bend the
highly tapered standard mast, seriously distorting the mizzen sail shape.
cheers
Derek
--- dbaldnz wrote:
I imagine the sail should be
reefed down as much as possible,
with no need for more sail than
the hull speed can use.
I don't know how much the boat
would heel over, spilling wind,
in advance of battens splitting.
I also intent to learn, and use
the mizzen sail for steering,
and if I do, 'bearing off by
mistake' should be avoidable.
PCB writes in the book '103
Sailing Rigs' that ash is a
good wood for battens. I
plan to try using Home Depot, D.Fir
perhaps with a fiberglass tape
laminated to it, rather than buy
exotic imported wood. [IOW, wood
from elsewhere than Oregon and
California.]
The only realisticly economical woods
I have available are D.Fir and Redwood.
> Bearing off to windward...I'll find out! [As soon as I launch].
> crunching and splitting now!
I imagine the sail should be
reefed down as much as possible,
with no need for more sail than
the hull speed can use.
I don't know how much the boat
would heel over, spilling wind,
in advance of battens splitting.
I also intent to learn, and use
the mizzen sail for steering,
and if I do, 'bearing off by
mistake' should be avoidable.
PCB writes in the book '103
Sailing Rigs' that ash is a
good wood for battens. I
plan to try using Home Depot, D.Fir
perhaps with a fiberglass tape
laminated to it, rather than buy
exotic imported wood. [IOW, wood
from elsewhere than Oregon and
California.]
The only realisticly economical woods
I have available are D.Fir and Redwood.
Just on the batten question, I guess you may not need tension on the
sheetlets when off the wind....more used for standing the leach up
when beating to windward in lighter weather.
Perhaps the greatest hazard will be if the skipper is too slow to
release the sheetlets when bearing away from windward to off the
wind.....I can hear the crunching and splitting now!
DonB
sheetlets when off the wind....more used for standing the leach up
when beating to windward in lighter weather.
Perhaps the greatest hazard will be if the skipper is too slow to
release the sheetlets when bearing away from windward to off the
wind.....I can hear the crunching and splitting now!
DonB
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
>
> I see the battens subject to pure
> bending when running from the wind,
> and when close hauled, much of the
> batten compression would be relieved
> by the backward pull of the sheets.
>
> A beam reach would be 50% in-between.
>
> The realization I was trying to share
> is that PB&F upsized the standard Micro
> mizzen mast to be very stout, and that
> this must be for the reason: that the
> batten sheets pull hard on the battens.
--- dbaldnz <oink@...> wrote:
what PB&F were thinking when they
invented this rig. The next question,
is does this rig work?
I see the battens subject to pure
bending when running from the wind,
and when close hauled, much of the
batten compression would be relieved
by the backward pull of the sheets.
A beam reach would be 50% in-between.
The realization I was trying to share
is that PB&F upsized the standard Micro
mizzen mast to be very stout, and that
this must be for the reason: that the
batten sheets pull hard on the battens.
> I think you would be more orI guess I am just trying to understand
> less correct in the close-hauled
> configuration.
> How about on a beam reach though?
what PB&F were thinking when they
invented this rig. The next question,
is does this rig work?
I see the battens subject to pure
bending when running from the wind,
and when close hauled, much of the
batten compression would be relieved
by the backward pull of the sheets.
A beam reach would be 50% in-between.
The realization I was trying to share
is that PB&F upsized the standard Micro
mizzen mast to be very stout, and that
this must be for the reason: that the
batten sheets pull hard on the battens.
Hi Derek, I'm looking forward with interest to your next report on
the rig.
It may be interesting some day when you are used to the rig as is,
to try her without the sheetlets, ie as a standard gaff yawl. It
would be horrendous if little performance difference was noted!
I hope to join you this southern summer.
DonB
the rig.
It may be interesting some day when you are used to the rig as is,
to try her without the sheetlets, ie as a standard gaff yawl. It
would be horrendous if little performance difference was noted!
I hope to join you this southern summer.
DonB
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Dawn and Derek" <dgw@d...> wrote:
> Oooh, this is fun :)
>
> What is meant here by a 'compression failure'?
> We're not talking about a force exerted on the sheet end of a
batten,
> pushing towards the mast, surely? A gaff sail with no battens can
be laced
> to the mast (can't push on a rope).
> Adding a large batten to carry roach doesn't prevent luff lacing
working (or
> sail track if you prefer).
>
> Perhaps a light, skinny batten could be flexed beyond the point of
no
> return. Perhaps a strong heavy batten would spoil sail shape.
Perhaps the
> happy medium is a vanishingly small subset of the possible battens.
>
> I'd like to know more about the breakages. Are you out there Jim?
>
> Derek
> [just in from a couple of days aboard Moriarty, the Chinese Gaffer
Micro]
I think you would be more or less correct in the close-hauled
configuration.
How about on a beam reach though? The sheetlets will restrain the
leach, and force a bow into the battens, unless the vang is very
tight, which I doubt is really possible with that long boom and
shallow vang angle.
As for Alert, the skipper is of advanced age, and the low stress
large true junk rig would I'm sure be a lot more seamanlike for his
ocean cruising.
I feel that the so-called chinese gaff rig is more suitable for
smaller craft, with the emphasis on better performance sheltered
water sailing or limited coastal cruising. I don't think battens
will be much of a problem in this case. I remember the extreme
tensioned rigs and hard use our wooden full length battens survived
in racing dinghies.
DonB
configuration.
How about on a beam reach though? The sheetlets will restrain the
leach, and force a bow into the battens, unless the vang is very
tight, which I doubt is really possible with that long boom and
shallow vang angle.
As for Alert, the skipper is of advanced age, and the low stress
large true junk rig would I'm sure be a lot more seamanlike for his
ocean cruising.
I feel that the so-called chinese gaff rig is more suitable for
smaller craft, with the emphasis on better performance sheltered
water sailing or limited coastal cruising. I don't think battens
will be much of a problem in this case. I remember the extreme
tensioned rigs and hard use our wooden full length battens survived
in racing dinghies.
DonB
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
> > But Bruce, I don't believe that the
> > sheets have any material effect
> > on the compression on the batten.
>
> The compression is caused by the sail
> pushed forward by wind. Pulling back would
> simply *have* to cancel the push forward.
> A physical law, the Conservation of Energy.
>
> Unless you belive in miracles, like
> these guys... <big grin>
>
>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05422a.htm
>
> > Why do marconi
> > sloops use a boom
> > vang?
>
> To hold the boom down, but I don't
> understand why you ask.
> But Bruce, I don't believe that theThe compression is caused by the sail
> sheets have any material effect
> on the compression on the batten.
pushed forward by wind. Pulling back would
simply *have* to cancel the push forward.
A physical law, the Conservation of Energy.
Unless you belive in miracles, like
these guys... <big grin>
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/05422a.htm
> Why do marconiTo hold the boom down, but I don't
> sloops use a boom
> vang?
understand why you ask.
>the red line shows the direction of theBut Bruce, I don't believe that the sheets have any material effect
>pull in the sheet, and the blue line
>represents the vector component of this
>that pulls the batten in tension.
>[the green line represents the downward
>portion of the pull.]
>
>For the Junk, the pull is much more downward
>than for the Chinese Gaff.
on the compression on the batten. Why do marconi sloops use a boom
vang?
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
See this diagram,
http://www.hallman.org/bolger/vectors.gif
the red line shows the direction of the
pull in the sheet, and the blue line
represents the vector component of this
that pulls the batten in tension.
[the green line represents the downward
portion of the pull.]
For the Junk, the pull is much more downward
than for the Chinese Gaff.
Scaling, of 100 pounds of pull in the
Chinese Gaff about 60 pounds results
in tension on the batten, for the Junk
about 10 pound results in tension, a
sixfold difference.
That is why PB&F call for such stout
mizzen masts/staffs, because so much
of the pull is angled in the direction
of the batten.
--- craig o'donnell <dadadata@f...> wrote:
http://www.hallman.org/bolger/vectors.gif
the red line shows the direction of the
pull in the sheet, and the blue line
represents the vector component of this
that pulls the batten in tension.
[the green line represents the downward
portion of the pull.]
For the Junk, the pull is much more downward
than for the Chinese Gaff.
Scaling, of 100 pounds of pull in the
Chinese Gaff about 60 pounds results
in tension on the batten, for the Junk
about 10 pound results in tension, a
sixfold difference.
That is why PB&F call for such stout
mizzen masts/staffs, because so much
of the pull is angled in the direction
of the batten.
--- craig o'donnell <dadadata@f...> wrote:
> >Look at the 'vector angles' of the
> >PB&F Chinese Gaff Rigg batten sheets.
> >
> >They are quite a bit different, with
> >angles that pull more in the same
> >line as the batten than the Chinese
> >Junk sheets.
>
> I don't think this is correct, Bruce.
> >Look at the 'vector angles'see:
http://www.hallman.org/bolger/vectors.gif
If length of the red arrow
represents 100 pounds of
pull on the sheet, the length
of the blue arrow represents
the portion of the pull that
acts in tension on the batten.
[The green arrow represents the
portion that acts to pull down
on the batten and sail.]
The blue 'tension' vector on the junk
rig is only 10% of the sheet force,
while the tension vector on the
Chinese Gaff Rig is 60% of the
sheet force, six times greater.
That is why PB&F always use a stout
mizzen mast [or staff] on the Chinese
Gaff Rig, because it is allows a
better angle of pull by the sheet
on the batten.
>OK. I was reacting to the discussion of "compression failures." It's trueYes, that's what I'm driving at, and "pulling the batten backwards"
>that the actual fracture is a tension failure of the outermost fibers of the
>batten, BUT, the guys that have been sailing them suggest that they fail
>when the batten as a whole is asked to withstand compression. It goes "out
>of column," assumes a bend, and fractures.
with the sheets is not going to fix this. The compression is in the
sail/batten system itself.
>A good design allows the crew to make an occasional "mistake." I don'tyes, and will be very tough to sheet in. This is sort of the limiting
>think we're talking about the hi-tech racers here. Note that with or
>without mast jaws, the sheets will compress the battan when the leech is
>forward of the mast.
case of why sheets aren't good at relieving stress on battens.
>You are correct that mast jaws will prevent the leech from sagging off.Precisely. And daysailers can pick their weather. Ocean sailers
>Either way tho, light battans are wanted with light winds so one gets an
>airfoil. Heavy battens are wanted for high winds to keep the sail flat.
>Tough to engineer.
cannot. Smaller sails have multiple times less stress on the srig
components, and there may be a limiting size to this rig idea. Lots
of junk rig guys are fiddling with hinged or cambered battens because
some camber does improve the windward ability of the more-traditionl
junk sail designs seen for example among members of the Junk Rig
Association.
>I enjoy and appreciate the work you've done on your web pages.Well, thanks. I'm not trying to rake anyone over the coals here, I
just think the discussion needs to be defined. The only "Chinese"
aspect of the rig is the multiple sheeting system, which is a
variation of a traditional system and more akin to the vangs on Dutch
spritsail-rigged boats than to Chinese sheets per se.
It is true that controlling each batten with a sheet will increase
the loading on the batten vis a vis battens which just "sit there"
and passively follow the sail shape; even these can break beyond a
certain point of course. I'm not enough of an engineer to quantify
how much difference this makes or where the stresses are concentrated.
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
OK. I was reacting to the discussion of "compression failures." It's true
that the actual fracture is a tension failure of the outermost fibers of the
batten, BUT, the guys that have been sailing them suggest that they fail
when the batten as a whole is asked to withstand compression. It goes "out
of column," assumes a bend, and fractures.
A good design allows the crew to make an occasional "mistake." I don't
think we're talking about the hi-tech racers here. Note that with or
without mast jaws, the sheets will compress the battan when the leech is
forward of the mast.
You are correct that mast jaws will prevent the leech from sagging off.
Either way tho, light battans are wanted with light winds so one gets an
airfoil. Heavy battens are wanted for high winds to keep the sail flat.
Tough to engineer.
I enjoy and appreciate the work you've done on your web pages.
Roger
derbyrm@...
http://derbyrm.mystarband.net
that the actual fracture is a tension failure of the outermost fibers of the
batten, BUT, the guys that have been sailing them suggest that they fail
when the batten as a whole is asked to withstand compression. It goes "out
of column," assumes a bend, and fractures.
A good design allows the crew to make an occasional "mistake." I don't
think we're talking about the hi-tech racers here. Note that with or
without mast jaws, the sheets will compress the battan when the leech is
forward of the mast.
You are correct that mast jaws will prevent the leech from sagging off.
Either way tho, light battans are wanted with light winds so one gets an
airfoil. Heavy battens are wanted for high winds to keep the sail flat.
Tough to engineer.
I enjoy and appreciate the work you've done on your web pages.
Roger
derbyrm@...
http://derbyrm.mystarband.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "craig o'donnell" <dadadata@...>
> > I believe Col. Hassler suggested that battens break when you allow
> > them to go forward of the mast on a run, either from inattention or
> > twist in the sail. Now the sheets ARE applying a destructive,
> > compressive force.
>
> I'm not sure what this has to do with anything. This is called a
"mistake".
>
> >They also take on a most non-aerodynamic "ess" shape in a strong breeze
when
> >on the "wrong" tack; i.e., when pressed against the mast.
>
> If they're too light. But neither of these issues have to do with a
> battened sail with jaws on the mast.
>What is meant here by a 'compression failure'??
Judging from what little Jim has said, the sail "bellies" thus
diminishing the distance from mast to leech, bending the battens and
at some point battens which are flexible and thin enough to maintain
sail shape simply break. The use of the term "compression" is
misleading. The wood will fail on the tension side, like in a thin
column bending or a cantilever of wood.... (not saying the battens
are a cantilever, I'm not enough of an engineer...)
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
>I believe Col. Hassler suggested that battens break when you allow them toI'm not sure what this has to do with anything. This is called a "mistake".
>go forward of the mast on a run, either from inattention or twist in the
>sail. Now the sheets ARE applying a destructive, compressive force.
>They also take on a most non-aerodynamic "ess" shape in a strong breeze whenIf they're too light. But neither of these issues have to do with a
>on the "wrong" tack; i.e., when pressed against the mast.
battened sail with jaws on the mast.
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
>Look at the 'vector angles' of theI don't think this is correct, Bruce.
>PB&F Chinese Gaff Rigg batten sheets.
>
>They are quite a bit different, with
>angles that pull more in the same
>line as the batten than the Chinese
>Junk sheets.
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Dawn and Derek" <dgw@d...> wrote:
And what....no pictures? Derek,yours is perhaps the only Chinese
Gaffer Micro out there actually sailing and it is most cruel to keep
us crazies in the dark like that :-)
So be kind,good and gentle while being quick with the
pictures.Otherwise,the aliens may return and clone another bunch of
you................!
Sincerely,
Peter"Nutmeg or Mega-Nut" Lenihan,excited by the prospect of some
nifty photos of the Mighty Moriarty doing her stuff.............
> > DerekMicro]
> [just in from a couple of days aboard Moriarty, the Chinese Gaffer
And what....no pictures? Derek,yours is perhaps the only Chinese
Gaffer Micro out there actually sailing and it is most cruel to keep
us crazies in the dark like that :-)
So be kind,good and gentle while being quick with the
pictures.Otherwise,the aliens may return and clone another bunch of
you................!
Sincerely,
Peter"Nutmeg or Mega-Nut" Lenihan,excited by the prospect of some
nifty photos of the Mighty Moriarty doing her stuff.............
Derek,
Do you have any photos posted anywhere?
Rick-
Do you have any photos posted anywhere?
Rick-
>
>
> Derek
> [just in from a couple of days aboard Moriarty, the Chinese Gaffer Micro]
>
Oooh, this is fun :)
What is meant here by a 'compression failure'?
We're not talking about a force exerted on the sheet end of a batten,
pushing towards the mast, surely? A gaff sail with no battens can be laced
to the mast (can't push on a rope).
Adding a large batten to carry roach doesn't prevent luff lacing working (or
sail track if you prefer).
Perhaps a light, skinny batten could be flexed beyond the point of no
return. Perhaps a strong heavy batten would spoil sail shape. Perhaps the
happy medium is a vanishingly small subset of the possible battens.
I'd like to know more about the breakages. Are you out there Jim?
Derek
[just in from a couple of days aboard Moriarty, the Chinese Gaffer Micro]
What is meant here by a 'compression failure'?
We're not talking about a force exerted on the sheet end of a batten,
pushing towards the mast, surely? A gaff sail with no battens can be laced
to the mast (can't push on a rope).
Adding a large batten to carry roach doesn't prevent luff lacing working (or
sail track if you prefer).
Perhaps a light, skinny batten could be flexed beyond the point of no
return. Perhaps a strong heavy batten would spoil sail shape. Perhaps the
happy medium is a vanishingly small subset of the possible battens.
I'd like to know more about the breakages. Are you out there Jim?
Derek
[just in from a couple of days aboard Moriarty, the Chinese Gaffer Micro]
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Bruce Hallman <bruce@h...> wrote:
Bruce,
I'm sure this is so, but not in gusty conditions, or in shifting winds
which is when the danger is highest. The moment that we need to
protect against is the moment the wind strikes obliquely and 'pops'
the sail against the mast.
Theoretically, it can work, but it has already been proven in
practice, at least in a large version of the rig, that the forces on
the battens during those moments can be much larger than in a
traditional junk.
If we don't mind the weight of very heavy battens, or the cost of
carbon fiber ones, then no worries.
However, I would like to evolve the idea a bit so that it can handle
these conditions more easily. I'm certainly no expert on the rig, but
given the info we have on its practical performance in heavier winds I
believe that for the CG to be a cruising rig it needs some tweaking.
I suggested 2 possibilities:
1) Make the sails smaller and use more of them to reduce the potential
loads and to increase the strength of the battens. Remember strength
decreases as the square of the length so even a 20% decrease will mean
a lot. One could also use hollow battens and put prestressed cable
inside to stiffen them.
Or
2) Alter the sail attachments to the mast so that the battens cannot
experience compressive loads. The chinese solved this by hefting the
sail off to one side. The cheapest and easiest option. I suggested
simply ending the battens prematurely and using a teardrop sail
section to attach it, or hoops, grommets and reinforced cloth.
(Of course we could go a little crazy here.. spring loaded battens,
pneumatic battens, hydraulic battens, etc. I'll leave those alone.
They all cost too much!)
Now #1 is a no brainer. We can always spread out the sailplan to
distribute the load. Look at Colvin's Kung Fu Tse. So I was wondering
what people thought, from a 'is this a valid idea' approach, about
option #2? Is there anything blaringly wrong with it?
Thanks in advance!
--T
><snip>
> --- craig o'donnell wrote:
>
> > >the compression out of the battens.
> >
> > Apparently it doesn't.
>
> Look at the 'vector angles' of the
> PB&F Chinese Gaff Rigg batten sheets.
Bruce,
I'm sure this is so, but not in gusty conditions, or in shifting winds
which is when the danger is highest. The moment that we need to
protect against is the moment the wind strikes obliquely and 'pops'
the sail against the mast.
Theoretically, it can work, but it has already been proven in
practice, at least in a large version of the rig, that the forces on
the battens during those moments can be much larger than in a
traditional junk.
If we don't mind the weight of very heavy battens, or the cost of
carbon fiber ones, then no worries.
However, I would like to evolve the idea a bit so that it can handle
these conditions more easily. I'm certainly no expert on the rig, but
given the info we have on its practical performance in heavier winds I
believe that for the CG to be a cruising rig it needs some tweaking.
I suggested 2 possibilities:
1) Make the sails smaller and use more of them to reduce the potential
loads and to increase the strength of the battens. Remember strength
decreases as the square of the length so even a 20% decrease will mean
a lot. One could also use hollow battens and put prestressed cable
inside to stiffen them.
Or
2) Alter the sail attachments to the mast so that the battens cannot
experience compressive loads. The chinese solved this by hefting the
sail off to one side. The cheapest and easiest option. I suggested
simply ending the battens prematurely and using a teardrop sail
section to attach it, or hoops, grommets and reinforced cloth.
(Of course we could go a little crazy here.. spring loaded battens,
pneumatic battens, hydraulic battens, etc. I'll leave those alone.
They all cost too much!)
Now #1 is a no brainer. We can always spread out the sailplan to
distribute the load. Look at Colvin's Kung Fu Tse. So I was wondering
what people thought, from a 'is this a valid idea' approach, about
option #2? Is there anything blaringly wrong with it?
Thanks in advance!
--T
I believe Col. Hassler suggested that battens break when you allow them to
go forward of the mast on a run, either from inattention or twist in the
sail. Now the sheets ARE applying a destructive, compressive force.
They also take on a most non-aerodynamic "ess" shape in a strong breeze when
on the "wrong" tack; i.e., when pressed against the mast.
Roger
derbyrm@...
http://derbyrm.mystarband.net
go forward of the mast on a run, either from inattention or twist in the
sail. Now the sheets ARE applying a destructive, compressive force.
They also take on a most non-aerodynamic "ess" shape in a strong breeze when
on the "wrong" tack; i.e., when pressed against the mast.
Roger
derbyrm@...
http://derbyrm.mystarband.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "craig o'donnell" <dadadata@...>
> >Well, then I suppose the question remains then, why is the Chinese
> >Gaff so much more a bother than a regular junk sail? And why are the
> >strains so much higher to make it impractical? Is it because of the
> >lack of overlap, thus unbalancing the sail?
>
> Chinese type battens go past the mast; there's no fore-aft
> compression on them forcing them into the mast.
--- craig o'donnell wrote:
PB&F Chinese Gaff Rigg batten sheets.
They are quite a bit different, with
angles that pull more in the same
line as the batten than the Chinese
Junk sheets. Coupled with the over-
sizing of the mizzen mast, the batten
sheets can and must take compression
out of the battens by pulling on the
ends 'in tension'.
I am not talking about the vector
angle, with the full sail up, in
the light air non-reefed condition.
But rather the vector angle with one,
and more-so, with two reefs in, the
batten sheets are nearly directly in
line, pulling the batten in tension,
reducing much of the compression.
> >the compression out of the battens.Look at the 'vector angles' of the
>
> Apparently it doesn't.
PB&F Chinese Gaff Rigg batten sheets.
They are quite a bit different, with
angles that pull more in the same
line as the batten than the Chinese
Junk sheets. Coupled with the over-
sizing of the mizzen mast, the batten
sheets can and must take compression
out of the battens by pulling on the
ends 'in tension'.
I am not talking about the vector
angle, with the full sail up, in
the light air non-reefed condition.
But rather the vector angle with one,
and more-so, with two reefs in, the
batten sheets are nearly directly in
line, pulling the batten in tension,
reducing much of the compression.
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, craig o'donnell <dadadata@f...> wrote:
materials on the CG rig extensively. I am concerned with the field
tests reporting 'compression loading' that causes the battens to bend
unduly and break more easily than they should.
Craig: As I already understood the problem Craig, and thanks for
confirming my own thoughts. I suppose I didn't make myself, and my
solution very clear. Then again, it was a muddy solution.. forget it
and look below ;)
Looking at Jim's rig, perhaps the sail on his boat is just too large
to rig as a straight Chinese Gaffer? Perhaps the CG requires a higher
aspect ratio when we get into longer lengths of boat.
In any event, I am still noodling this one a bit...however:
A very simple solution might be to stop the battens 6" (or so) before
the mast. Attach the sail to the mast with a 'teardrop' of double
reinforced sailcloth, or just plain hoops but with a very sturdy bolt
rope on the luff and lateral patches attached to the battens
themselves. This way you eliminate the compression loading and
maintain almost all of the stability as if the sail were fully
battened and the battens were attached to the luff. Depending on your
mood, you might leave the gaff and boom attached like a regular gaff
sail or not. I would favor the former.
Not only do you eliminate the compression loading, but you may even be
improving the airflow considering the sailcloth will now shift to the
leeward side. Personally I favor the 'teardrop' method in principle,
mainly because Wharram has had so much success with it. But I'd bet
the hoop method would work as well.
How does this sound?
--T
> >Well, then I suppose the question remains then, why is the ChineseRe: 103 rigs - Yes, I own a copy of 103 rigs and I've read the
> >Gaff so much more a bother than a regular junk sail? And why are the
> >strains so much higher to make it impractical? Is it because of the
> >lack of overlap, thus unbalancing the sail?
>
> Chinese type battens go past the mast; there's no fore-aft
> compression on them forcing them into the mast.
materials on the CG rig extensively. I am concerned with the field
tests reporting 'compression loading' that causes the battens to bend
unduly and break more easily than they should.
Craig: As I already understood the problem Craig, and thanks for
confirming my own thoughts. I suppose I didn't make myself, and my
solution very clear. Then again, it was a muddy solution.. forget it
and look below ;)
Looking at Jim's rig, perhaps the sail on his boat is just too large
to rig as a straight Chinese Gaffer? Perhaps the CG requires a higher
aspect ratio when we get into longer lengths of boat.
In any event, I am still noodling this one a bit...however:
A very simple solution might be to stop the battens 6" (or so) before
the mast. Attach the sail to the mast with a 'teardrop' of double
reinforced sailcloth, or just plain hoops but with a very sturdy bolt
rope on the luff and lateral patches attached to the battens
themselves. This way you eliminate the compression loading and
maintain almost all of the stability as if the sail were fully
battened and the battens were attached to the luff. Depending on your
mood, you might leave the gaff and boom attached like a regular gaff
sail or not. I would favor the former.
Not only do you eliminate the compression loading, but you may even be
improving the airflow considering the sailcloth will now shift to the
leeward side. Personally I favor the 'teardrop' method in principle,
mainly because Wharram has had so much success with it. But I'd bet
the hoop method would work as well.
How does this sound?
--T
>The PB&F Chinese Gaff Rigs all have aApparently it doesn't. And that's not what sheets are for, anyway.
>relatively stout mizzen mast, or staff
>that pulls on the batten sheets, which
>I see taking much, if not most, of
>the compression out of the battens.
And if they are doing that, you're going to have an awful time
sheeting. And that's not what they do on a Chinese lugsail.
This is a battened gaff -- Commodore Munroe had them, I have a couple
pictures of Nat Herreshoff's yacht CLARA using one, though of an
interesting variant shape, and I have a drawing of a batwing cat-yawl
called KUMA from the late 1800s which was more of a battened gaff
than a canoe type batwing.
Wood actually doesn't mind compression much. It's the tension that
the outside of the batten experiences that causes the wood to give it
up. This is why old time railroad truss bridges would have wooden
compression members and wire rod tension members. The compression in
question is the force down the length oft he batten, and because
jaws force the batten to stay put at the mast end, as the sail
bellies it compresses the batten, and the batten curves. The battens
are attached to the sail; the compression is not coming from the
sheet attachment, although sheeting in would cause additional
compression forces.
The point seems to be that you cannot make a wooden batten which
combines lightness and the proper taper to result in an aerodynamic
sail shape as we understand it today, AND which functions in all the
levels of wind you'd see at sea, in the SIZE that a largish cruising
yacht needs. May well work great on a Micro.
Perhaps there need to be stainless cables in grooves in the sides of
the battens which will "kick in" when the bending forces reach a
danger point. Dunno.
Reuel Parker was apparently happy with PVC tubing cored with wood
(ash?) on his sails on some of his designs, but it might also be that
he's using them on sails which are smaller than ALERT's.
All I can tell you is that Jim Melcher has reported in several places
that the battens were breaking too easily for him to feel comfortable
with it as a seagoing cruising rig, and that he's switching over to
the Chinese lugsail. He said he worked closely with PCB trying to
fine-tune the rig over a period of years.
And I am going on my understanding of the forces involved in battened
sails, which I've studied pretty closely.
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
--- craig o'donnell wrote:
relatively stout mizzen mast, or staff
that pulls on the batten sheets, which
I see taking much, if not most, of
the compression out of the battens.
That is why the diameter of the aft mast
is surprisingly large, as it shares the
load from the mainsail with the main mast.
> Chinese type battens go past the masTThe PB&F Chinese Gaff Rigs all have a
> there's no fore-aft compression on them
> forcing them into the mast.
relatively stout mizzen mast, or staff
that pulls on the batten sheets, which
I see taking much, if not most, of
the compression out of the battens.
That is why the diameter of the aft mast
is surprisingly large, as it shares the
load from the mainsail with the main mast.
>> Well, then I suppose the question remainsI should have an illo of a Chinese Gaffer on my Cheap Pages. Can't recall.
>
>For the most complete explanation of PB&F's
>rational for the Chinese Gaff Rig, read the
>ten pages of writing and diagrams, in
>the addendum to the book _103 Sailing
>Rigs_.
>
>They are essentially combining the better aero-
>dynamics of the Gaff Rig [rig 14] with the
>superior control, lower stress, and better
>reefing ability of the Junk Rig [rig 18].
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
>Well, then I suppose the question remains then, why is the ChineseChinese type battens go past the mast; there's no fore-aft
>Gaff so much more a bother than a regular junk sail? And why are the
>strains so much higher to make it impractical? Is it because of the
>lack of overlap, thus unbalancing the sail?
compression on them forcing them into the mast.
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
> Well, then I suppose the question remainsFor the most complete explanation of PB&F's
rational for the Chinese Gaff Rig, read the
ten pages of writing and diagrams, in
the addendum to the book _103 Sailing
Rigs_.
They are essentially combining the better aero-
dynamics of the Gaff Rig [rig 14] with the
superior control, lower stress, and better
reefing ability of the Junk Rig [rig 18].
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, craig o'donnell <dadadata@f...> wrote:
Gaff so much more a bother than a regular junk sail? And why are the
strains so much higher to make it impractical? Is it because of the
lack of overlap, thus unbalancing the sail?
--T
> >Why not just use thicker wood battens?Well, then I suppose the question remains then, why is the Chinese
>
> At a certain point, too heavy.
> --
Gaff so much more a bother than a regular junk sail? And why are the
strains so much higher to make it impractical? Is it because of the
lack of overlap, thus unbalancing the sail?
--T
>Why not just use thicker wood battens?At a certain point, too heavy.
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
--- craig o'donnell wrote:
> carbon battens $$$$Why not just use thicker wood battens?
>Personally, I have concluded that the reportedWell, Jim Melcher is not a dodo, and he used the rig in ocean
>batten failure in the Chinese Gaff was because
>the battens were not strong enough, which would
>be easily fixed by useing a strong enough batten!
cruising, and it seems that he found it too troublesome in that case.
Sure, you could use carbon battens which would be super strong and
probably never break - and would be light - but at $$$$.
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
--- timothyennuinet wrote:
the battens are not attached to the mast, but
they have a yolk bolted to their ends, which is
loosely restrained around the mast with a rope
tie. I don't see any compressive force 'as is
strut' in the batten, but there is quite a bit
of bending stress. PB&F say that the battens
should be made extra thick, observed, and then
trimmed/thinned so that the actual bend shape
of the batten is aerodynamic.
Personally, I have concluded that the reported
batten failure in the Chinese Gaff was because
the battens were not strong enough, which would
be easily fixed by useing a strong enough batten!
> Hi all. I think that the compressive loadIn the case of the Micro Navigator Chinese Gaff,
> failure in the battens that Jim was
> experiencing was likely a result of the
> lack of give in the sail. The battens are
> attached to the mast and so now they are load
> bearing instead of simply being struts. and they
> go snappy. This is similar to the 'loose footed'
> vs 'laced to the boom' mainsail question.
the battens are not attached to the mast, but
they have a yolk bolted to their ends, which is
loosely restrained around the mast with a rope
tie. I don't see any compressive force 'as is
strut' in the batten, but there is quite a bit
of bending stress. PB&F say that the battens
should be made extra thick, observed, and then
trimmed/thinned so that the actual bend shape
of the batten is aerodynamic.
Personally, I have concluded that the reported
batten failure in the Chinese Gaff was because
the battens were not strong enough, which would
be easily fixed by useing a strong enough batten!
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "Derek Waters" <dgw@d...> wrote:
Hi all. I think that the compressive load failure in the battens that
Jim was experiencing was likely a result of the lack of give in the
sail. The battens are attached to the mast and so now they are load
bearing instead of simply being struts.. and they go snappy. This is
similar to the 'loose footed' vs 'laced to the boom' mainsail question.
A way to remedy this might be to slightly alter the rig so that all of
the spars and battens were attached to the mast with loose, beaded
rope parrels that allow the gaff, boom and batten to 'float' from side
to side on the mast, resting on the masts aft quarters with each tack.
Forget the jaws and steel strapping. Use some oversized nylon and
wooden beads for the rope parrels so they will absorb shock loads.
Oversize the rigging in general since it will be taking more strain.
And size the batten parrels slightly (like, 1/2") longer than the boom
and gaff parrels.
--T
> De,Note
>
> The only picture I've been able to find online is at
>http://www.leow.de/chinese/chinese.htmlshowing Jim Melcher's Bolger
> Manatee 'Alert' with an early incarnation of the 'Chinese Gaff' rig.
> relatively low gaff angle and very low 'sheet staff' height comapred tore-rigging as
> later sailplans.
>
> Jim wrote in the Junkrig Yahoo group to the effect that he was
> a junk, mentioning batten failure as a problem.Antispray
>
> John McDaniel posts to this group and is well on in constructing
> with a CG rig.out :)
>
> I've just finished rigging a Micro with the CG rig but don't have enough
> miles under the keel to give useful answers. Worked fine first time
Hi all. I think that the compressive load failure in the battens that
Jim was experiencing was likely a result of the lack of give in the
sail. The battens are attached to the mast and so now they are load
bearing instead of simply being struts.. and they go snappy. This is
similar to the 'loose footed' vs 'laced to the boom' mainsail question.
A way to remedy this might be to slightly alter the rig so that all of
the spars and battens were attached to the mast with loose, beaded
rope parrels that allow the gaff, boom and batten to 'float' from side
to side on the mast, resting on the masts aft quarters with each tack.
Forget the jaws and steel strapping. Use some oversized nylon and
wooden beads for the rope parrels so they will absorb shock loads.
Oversize the rigging in general since it will be taking more strain.
And size the batten parrels slightly (like, 1/2") longer than the boom
and gaff parrels.
--T
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, John Bell <smallboatdesigner@m...>
wrote:
Bruce in some manly sort of commiserating at his local pub as we
drown our sorrows in litres of hop juice......(gnashing of teeth
sound)........plaintive pleas offered up to the god of
moderators....evil plans laid down to kidnap our benevolent moderator
and actually force him to drink REAL beer(Canadian style:-) )......my
knees tremble at the simple thought of it all.....eyeeee!.......and
to think we never even clicked on that evil link and were
thus"deprived" of enjoying the crime yet we must "do the time".....oh
the misery of it all.............the injustice.....the lack of
humour.........I need a beer!
Sincerely,
Peter Lenihan, now"forced" to seek solace in the demon drink until
better times return,from along the shores of the cloudy,damp shores
of the St.Lawrence.........gulp,gulp,slurp and guzzle........
wrote:
> I agree, it seems unecessarily harsh.WHAT?! Moi aussi?! Oh deary me,this means that I'll have to join
>
> It's not just Bruce who was kicked off, there were
> others including Peter Lenihan.
>
> Free the Spam Complaint Five!
>
> C'mon Gregg...
>
> JB
Bruce in some manly sort of commiserating at his local pub as we
drown our sorrows in litres of hop juice......(gnashing of teeth
sound)........plaintive pleas offered up to the god of
moderators....evil plans laid down to kidnap our benevolent moderator
and actually force him to drink REAL beer(Canadian style:-) )......my
knees tremble at the simple thought of it all.....eyeeee!.......and
to think we never even clicked on that evil link and were
thus"deprived" of enjoying the crime yet we must "do the time".....oh
the misery of it all.............the injustice.....the lack of
humour.........I need a beer!
Sincerely,
Peter Lenihan, now"forced" to seek solace in the demon drink until
better times return,from along the shores of the cloudy,damp shores
of the St.Lawrence.........gulp,gulp,slurp and guzzle........
I agree, it seems unecessarily harsh.
It's not just Bruce who was kicked off, there were
others including Peter Lenihan.
Free the Spam Complaint Five!
C'mon Gregg...
JB
--- lon wells <lononriver@...> wrote:
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
It's not just Bruce who was kicked off, there were
others including Peter Lenihan.
Free the Spam Complaint Five!
C'mon Gregg...
JB
--- lon wells <lononriver@...> wrote:
> Bruce Hector is someone that is actually out doing__________________________________
> some interesting stuff on the water that is worth
> hearing about. Someone with a sense of humor that
> does not take himself too seriously.
> Bruce is a wealth of knowledge and has always been a
> positive addition to this group.
>
> The moderator allowed the original post. So he
> needs
> to take some responsiblity. This has been a problem
> on
> yahoo which is solved my monorting new members first
> few post. To Kick Bruce off for such a thing would
> be
> wrong. I hope this is not the case and it is just
> some
> computer problem. I would have to reconcider any
> group that would kick out someone such as Bruce
> Hector.
>
> He is a sailor that is always welcome at my dock
> Lon
>
> --- Lincoln Ross <lincolnr@...> wrote:
> > Bruce replied to an off color spam (which compared
> > certain acts to
> > certain weather conditions) in order to make fun
> of
> > it, but he didn't change the title, which was
> itself rather nasty.
> > I'll bet that was what
> > happened. His reply itself was inoffensive. But
> > someone complained so I
> > bet everyone who used that message title got
> canned.
> >
> > >John Bell wrote:
> > >I just got an email from Bruce Hector, who seems
> to
> > have been locked out of
> > >the Bolger group. Any ideas what happened?
> > Probably a Yahoo glitch. b/c
> > >Gregg has been a very easy to deal with
> moderator.
> > It helps that this group
> > >is pretty easy to deal with too.
> > >snip
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site
> design software
>http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or
> flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed,
> thanks, Fred' posts
> - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts
> and <snip> away
> - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box
> 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:
>bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
Bruce Hector is someone that is actually out doing
some interesting stuff on the water that is worth
hearing about. Someone with a sense of humor that
does not take himself too seriously.
Bruce is a wealth of knowledge and has always been a
positive addition to this group.
The moderator allowed the original post. So he needs
to take some responsiblity. This has been a problem on
yahoo which is solved my monorting new members first
few post. To Kick Bruce off for such a thing would be
wrong. I hope this is not the case and it is just some
computer problem. I would have to reconcider any
group that would kick out someone such as Bruce
Hector.
He is a sailor that is always welcome at my dock
Lon
--- Lincoln Ross <lincolnr@...> wrote:
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
some interesting stuff on the water that is worth
hearing about. Someone with a sense of humor that
does not take himself too seriously.
Bruce is a wealth of knowledge and has always been a
positive addition to this group.
The moderator allowed the original post. So he needs
to take some responsiblity. This has been a problem on
yahoo which is solved my monorting new members first
few post. To Kick Bruce off for such a thing would be
wrong. I hope this is not the case and it is just some
computer problem. I would have to reconcider any
group that would kick out someone such as Bruce
Hector.
He is a sailor that is always welcome at my dock
Lon
--- Lincoln Ross <lincolnr@...> wrote:
> Bruce replied to an off color spam (which compareditself rather nasty.
> certain acts to
> certain weather conditions) in order to make fun of
> it, but he didn't change the title, which was
> I'll bet that was what__________________________________
> happened. His reply itself was inoffensive. But
> someone complained so I
> bet everyone who used that message title got canned.
>
> >John Bell wrote:
> >I just got an email from Bruce Hector, who seems to
> have been locked out of
> >the Bolger group. Any ideas what happened?
> Probably a Yahoo glitch. b/c
> >Gregg has been a very easy to deal with moderator.
> It helps that this group
> >is pretty easy to deal with too.
> >snip
> >
>
>
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
De,
The only picture I've been able to find online is at
http://www.leow.de/chinese/chinese.htmlshowing Jim Melcher's Bolger
Manatee 'Alert' with an early incarnation of the 'Chinese Gaff' rig. Note
relatively low gaff angle and very low 'sheet staff' height comapred to
later sailplans.
Jim wrote in the Junkrig Yahoo group to the effect that he was re-rigging as
a junk, mentioning batten failure as a problem.
John McDaniel posts to this group and is well on in constructing Antispray
with a CG rig.
I've just finished rigging a Micro with the CG rig but don't have enough
miles under the keel to give useful answers. Worked fine first time out :)
cheers
Derek
The only picture I've been able to find online is at
http://www.leow.de/chinese/chinese.htmlshowing Jim Melcher's Bolger
Manatee 'Alert' with an early incarnation of the 'Chinese Gaff' rig. Note
relatively low gaff angle and very low 'sheet staff' height comapred to
later sailplans.
Jim wrote in the Junkrig Yahoo group to the effect that he was re-rigging as
a junk, mentioning batten failure as a problem.
John McDaniel posts to this group and is well on in constructing Antispray
with a CG rig.
I've just finished rigging a Micro with the CG rig but don't have enough
miles under the keel to give useful answers. Worked fine first time out :)
cheers
Derek
>Bolger rig question for y'all.De,
>
>In the very enjoyable '103 small boat rigs' I found an Afterword or final
>chapter which discussed a "Chinese Gaff" rig, a cross between the traditional
>gaffer and a Chinese balanced lug (junk) rig.
>
>It was intriguing! I know a bit about junk rigs, but had not seen this
>variation before (though the old Rushton Batwing canoe rig is somewhat
>similar).
>
>Does anyone know of a boat that was actually rigged (and sailed) as Bolger
>Chinese Gaff? if so, what was the result? happiness or woe? anyone know
>where to find photos online of such a boat?
>
>de
I think Jim Melcher of Alert posted to Junk Rigs about a month ago.
Said he's going back to the Chinese Lug.
--
Craig O'Donnell
Sinepuxent Ancestors & Boats
<http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~fassitt/>
The Proa FAQ <http://boat-links.com/proafaq.html>
The Cheap Pages <http://www2.friend.ly.net/~dadadata/>
Sailing Canoes, Polytarp Sails, Bamboo, Chinese Junks,
American Proas, the Bolger Boat Honor Roll,
Plywood Boats, Bamboo Rafts, &c.
_________________________________
-- Professor of Boatology -- Junkomologist
-- Macintosh kinda guy
Friend of Wanda the Wonder Cat, 1991-1997.
_________________________________
---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses by friend.ly.net.]
Bolger rig question for y'all.
In the very enjoyable '103 small boat rigs' I found an Afterword or final
chapter which discussed a "Chinese Gaff" rig, a cross between the traditional
gaffer and a Chinese balanced lug (junk) rig.
It was intriguing! I know a bit about junk rigs, but had not seen this
variation before (though the old Rushton Batwing canoe rig is somewhat
similar).
Does anyone know of a boat that was actually rigged (and sailed) as Bolger
Chinese Gaff? if so, what was the result? happiness or woe? anyone know
where to find photos online of such a boat?
de
--
.............................................................................
:De Clarke, Software Engineer UCO/Lick Observatory, UCSC:
:Mail:de@...| Your planet's immune system is trying to get rid :
:Web: www.ucolick.org | of you. --Kurt Vonnegut :
:1024D/B9C9E76E | F892 5F17 8E0A F095 05CD EE8B D169 EDAA B9C9 E76E:
In the very enjoyable '103 small boat rigs' I found an Afterword or final
chapter which discussed a "Chinese Gaff" rig, a cross between the traditional
gaffer and a Chinese balanced lug (junk) rig.
It was intriguing! I know a bit about junk rigs, but had not seen this
variation before (though the old Rushton Batwing canoe rig is somewhat
similar).
Does anyone know of a boat that was actually rigged (and sailed) as Bolger
Chinese Gaff? if so, what was the result? happiness or woe? anyone know
where to find photos online of such a boat?
de
--
.............................................................................
:De Clarke, Software Engineer UCO/Lick Observatory, UCSC:
:Mail:de@...| Your planet's immune system is trying to get rid :
:Web: www.ucolick.org | of you. --Kurt Vonnegut :
:1024D/B9C9E76E | F892 5F17 8E0A F095 05CD EE8B D169 EDAA B9C9 E76E: