Re: [bolger] Spinnakers
Bruce Hallman wrote:
Years ago I went out on a nice 1920's gaff-rigged cutter, no winches,
about 40-45 feet overall, to look at the Sydney-to-Hobart yachts
competing in the 'King of the Derwent' (they sail downriver - well
estuary - out to sea a little to Bruny Island and back again, it's a
nice social event race after the S-to-H, and the return leg often has a
sea-breeze pushing them up river.)
It was a fairly breezy day and the crew were inexperienced on this boat,
not to mention in general, so we only flew a roller jib, partly rolled
(bad shape) and the mainsail with a reef or two in it, no topsail.
We went down stream and met the leading boats on their return leg. These
were maxis with huge spinnakers flying, powering up river - very
impressive , it looked very yachty and I'm sure got lots of photos taken
and published in magazines.
We went past them a bit then turned around to sail parallel to them to
enjoy the view ... that lasted about a minute, but we couldn't sail
slowly enough, without setting the sails awfully, and our 60+ year old
low tech boat soon blew these hi tech things into the weeds. It must
have been quite embarrassing for them to be blown away by a
dirtybottomed, ancient, under-crewed, winchless gaffer. If they had
found out the skipper was still recovering from a triple-bypass I
suspect there would have been suicides :)
Chris
>>[Bolger] seems to acknowledgeWell, some boats _have_ to fly them or they go nowhere.
>>that they are useful when going downwind,
>>but observes that he has never
>>had much difficulty about going downwind himself...
>>Jim
>
>
> That is *such* a typical Bolgerism,
> it remindes me of the parable
> _The King Has No Clothes_,
> "Eh Hem, just why do you fly a spinnaker?"
Years ago I went out on a nice 1920's gaff-rigged cutter, no winches,
about 40-45 feet overall, to look at the Sydney-to-Hobart yachts
competing in the 'King of the Derwent' (they sail downriver - well
estuary - out to sea a little to Bruny Island and back again, it's a
nice social event race after the S-to-H, and the return leg often has a
sea-breeze pushing them up river.)
It was a fairly breezy day and the crew were inexperienced on this boat,
not to mention in general, so we only flew a roller jib, partly rolled
(bad shape) and the mainsail with a reef or two in it, no topsail.
We went down stream and met the leading boats on their return leg. These
were maxis with huge spinnakers flying, powering up river - very
impressive , it looked very yachty and I'm sure got lots of photos taken
and published in magazines.
We went past them a bit then turned around to sail parallel to them to
enjoy the view ... that lasted about a minute, but we couldn't sail
slowly enough, without setting the sails awfully, and our 60+ year old
low tech boat soon blew these hi tech things into the weeds. It must
have been quite embarrassing for them to be blown away by a
dirtybottomed, ancient, under-crewed, winchless gaffer. If they had
found out the skipper was still recovering from a triple-bypass I
suspect there would have been suicides :)
Chris
I don't have a spinnaker on any of my current boats, but I note that when going downwind, the sails do not function as airfoils but just stick out in the wind. This is why a run is the slowest point of sailing. One way to improve downwind sail area is to increase sail area and the normal way to do this is to hoist another sail. A Lightning, for example, has a main and jib of 200 sq ft and a spinnaker of 200 sq ft. Sailing a Lightning down wind without a spinnaker is notably slow and dull. A spinnaker increases boat speed and liveliness dramatically (and you better have a gorilla trimming the sheet).
For the kind of sailing I do these days, the increased performance offered by a spinnaker is more trouble than it's worth, but spinnakers really do work.
John T
For the kind of sailing I do these days, the increased performance offered by a spinnaker is more trouble than it's worth, but spinnakers really do work.
John T
----- Original Message -----
From: Bruce Hallman
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2005 10:40 AM
Subject: Re: [bolger] Spinnakers
> [Bolger] seems to acknowledge
> that they are useful when going downwind,
> but observes that he has never
> had much difficulty about going downwind himself...
> Jim
That is *such* a typical Bolgerism,
it remindes me of the parable
_The King Has No Clothes_,
"Eh Hem, just why do you fly a spinnaker?"
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- Pls add your comments at the TOP, SIGN your posts, and snip away
- 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
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bolger/
b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.1 - Release Date: 3/23/2005
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> [Bolger] seems to acknowledgeThat is *such* a typical Bolgerism,
> that they are useful when going downwind,
> but observes that he has never
> had much difficulty about going downwind himself...
> Jim
it remindes me of the parable
_The King Has No Clothes_,
"Eh Hem, just why do you fly a spinnaker?"
In a message dated 3/24/05 8:53:01 AM Central Standard Time,
omegacubed@...writes:
Thank you for trying to remedy my ignorance! Despite (or because of)
my advanced age, I don't remember much about the 19th century. Still, I'm
inclined to think that this factoid re-enforces my recommendation that it is the
use of a pole to windward to guy out the luff as the criteria distinguishing a
"spinnaker" from other head sails has some merit. (NOT "headwalls" as
unrestrained AOL spell-check rendered it!) (I think that a query about the distinction
between a "spinnaker" and other head sails was the question that I was
responding to.)
I wonder whether "Sphynx" in fact ran with a downwind head sail that
was guyed by a pole to the clew of the sail?
I looked up "Sphynx" in W.P. Stephens' "Traditions and Memories of
American Yachting." The index gives one reference to "Sphynx," which reads, in
toto:
"When the cutter Sphynx in 1866, set a triangular running sail on the other
side from her mainsail, the average paid hand who pronounced her name "Spinx"
transformed the word into "Spinxer," whence the present "spinnaker"- a useful
word, but most of the terms added to the yachting vocabulary of recent years
serve only to debase it."
This account is buried in a discussion of the adoption of the "Marconi
Rig" - i.e. wire-trussed masts. There is no indication that Stephens ever saw
"Sphynx" in action. This description could just as well describe a sloop
running "wing-and-wing" as one using a "spinnaker," in the sense that I advocate.
The jacket cover on my edition (WoodenBoat, 1989) shows two large sloops
racing downwind with large jibs boomed out by poles to the clews with the luffs
attached to the bowsprits - i.e. the head sails are big "jibs" boomed out by what
I was raised to know as "whisker poles".
That the name "spinnaker" ultimately derives from the "Sphynx" seems
plausible to me. Whether the "Sphinx" actually poled the tack and luff of its
head sail out to windward, as opposed to the clew and leech, is not clear from
Stephens' account. 90% of my boating is of the armchair variety, so if you
could identify some other literary sources for the proposition that "Sphynx" was
the genesis of "spinnakers," I would be most appreciative.
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
omegacubed@...writes:
> I have read in several sources that the word spinnaker cameHi, Will:
> from a monstrous sail set by an 1800's racing sloop named SPHYNX. It
> was an asymmetrical spinnaker set on a conventional spinnaker pole, and
> was dubbed "Sphynx's acre" by the competition, who of course soon had
> Sphynx's acres of their own. The symmetrical, or "balloon" spinnaker,
> came later.
Thank you for trying to remedy my ignorance! Despite (or because of)
my advanced age, I don't remember much about the 19th century. Still, I'm
inclined to think that this factoid re-enforces my recommendation that it is the
use of a pole to windward to guy out the luff as the criteria distinguishing a
"spinnaker" from other head sails has some merit. (NOT "headwalls" as
unrestrained AOL spell-check rendered it!) (I think that a query about the distinction
between a "spinnaker" and other head sails was the question that I was
responding to.)
I wonder whether "Sphynx" in fact ran with a downwind head sail that
was guyed by a pole to the clew of the sail?
I looked up "Sphynx" in W.P. Stephens' "Traditions and Memories of
American Yachting." The index gives one reference to "Sphynx," which reads, in
toto:
"When the cutter Sphynx in 1866, set a triangular running sail on the other
side from her mainsail, the average paid hand who pronounced her name "Spinx"
transformed the word into "Spinxer," whence the present "spinnaker"- a useful
word, but most of the terms added to the yachting vocabulary of recent years
serve only to debase it."
This account is buried in a discussion of the adoption of the "Marconi
Rig" - i.e. wire-trussed masts. There is no indication that Stephens ever saw
"Sphynx" in action. This description could just as well describe a sloop
running "wing-and-wing" as one using a "spinnaker," in the sense that I advocate.
The jacket cover on my edition (WoodenBoat, 1989) shows two large sloops
racing downwind with large jibs boomed out by poles to the clews with the luffs
attached to the bowsprits - i.e. the head sails are big "jibs" boomed out by what
I was raised to know as "whisker poles".
That the name "spinnaker" ultimately derives from the "Sphynx" seems
plausible to me. Whether the "Sphinx" actually poled the tack and luff of its
head sail out to windward, as opposed to the clew and leech, is not clear from
Stephens' account. 90% of my boating is of the armchair variety, so if you
could identify some other literary sources for the proposition that "Sphynx" was
the genesis of "spinnakers," I would be most appreciative.
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bruce Hallman wrote:
He discusses the use of spinnakers in Rig 26 Cat with Spinnaker and
again with Rig 51 Gaff Mainsail with Spinnaker. He seems to acknowledge
that they are useful when going downwind, but observes that he has never
had much difficulty about going downwind himself and he references only
one time that he found it very useful to have a bit more speed in that
direction than did another non-spinnaker equipped boat.
Most of Phil's attraction to the use of spinnakers on the two rigs he
writes up are that the lack of standing rigging in the way of the sail
handling is what makes them attractive in these rigs.
He observes that the people who make up the rules for racing yachts have
all but banned spinnaker use on catboats where, indeed, they might be
very useful. Not a big advocate of ocean racing is our man PCB.
Jim
> > was dubbed "Sphynx's acre" by the competitionHi Bruce,
> > -- Will
>
> I don't have my copy of 101/103 Sail Rigs handy, but
> I suspect that PCB writes about Spinnakers there,
> is anybody familiar with what he wrote?
He discusses the use of spinnakers in Rig 26 Cat with Spinnaker and
again with Rig 51 Gaff Mainsail with Spinnaker. He seems to acknowledge
that they are useful when going downwind, but observes that he has never
had much difficulty about going downwind himself and he references only
one time that he found it very useful to have a bit more speed in that
direction than did another non-spinnaker equipped boat.
Most of Phil's attraction to the use of spinnakers on the two rigs he
writes up are that the lack of standing rigging in the way of the sail
handling is what makes them attractive in these rigs.
He observes that the people who make up the rules for racing yachts have
all but banned spinnaker use on catboats where, indeed, they might be
very useful. Not a big advocate of ocean racing is our man PCB.
Jim
> ItA picture on a calendar I have shows such a sail, but I believe in
> was an asymmetrical spinnaker set on a conventional spinnaker pole...
this picture the tack is at the foot of the mast, not on the bow. It
looks very awkward to the modern eye. It's a modern photo; I assume
it's from a wooden boat or classic boat regatta.
Peter
> was dubbed "Sphynx's acre" by the competitionI don't have my copy of 101/103 Sail Rigs handy, but
> -- Will
I suspect that PCB writes about Spinnakers there,
is anybody familiar with what he wrote?
Bill from MN states that the original spinnakers were symmetrical. Beg
to differ. I have read in several sources that the word spinnaker came
from a monstrous sail set by an 1800's racing sloop named SPHYNX. It
was an asymmetrical spinnaker set on a conventional spinnaker pole, and
was dubbed "Sphynx's acre" by the competition, who of course soon had
Sphynx's acres of their own. The symmetrical, or "balloon" spinnaker,
came later. When the parachute was developed in the 1920's,
symmetricals were often called "parachute" spinnakers.
-- Will
to differ. I have read in several sources that the word spinnaker came
from a monstrous sail set by an 1800's racing sloop named SPHYNX. It
was an asymmetrical spinnaker set on a conventional spinnaker pole, and
was dubbed "Sphynx's acre" by the competition, who of course soon had
Sphynx's acres of their own. The symmetrical, or "balloon" spinnaker,
came later. When the parachute was developed in the 1920's,
symmetricals were often called "parachute" spinnakers.
-- Will