Your favourite, the Miracle, describe something like that for novices http://www.miracledinghy.org/Article%20-%20Spinnaker%20pole%20systems%20-%20Halo%20Winter%202010.pdf" rel="nofollow - here

 

But up-mast storage I think went out of favour from the complexity and horrible windage when not in use. It was largely superseded by on-boom flyaways, with one pole or two (checkout Mirrors and Merlins, another two of your favourites)

How often do you think you'll sail in insufficient breeze to make it not worth heating up your Farr-on-steroids? (and yes I get you may sometimes want to cheat the tide, I grew up sailing on an estuary) 

I've no idea how you fully automate a single-pole to switch from one gybe to the other, but twin poles give sail stability in that you could have both set during gybe. More cost, weight and complexity tho.

Also might be worth checking out the original Phil Morrison designed set-up for the RS200 kite that was originally designed to be used goose-winged too. The pole was pulled inwards and the halyard pulled further up the mast - but there was all sorts of witchcraft needed with the strings in the pole.

With no jib in the way, the foredeck is another place to store a pole when not in use

I think it depends of your rationale.  For ultimate performance I totally agree- especially about the bit small lakes and hoist and drop times... I know when I was a kid we could get away without flying the kite on a 420 at the winter pond without losing too much, and probably gaining a place or two if someone in front screwed up.  

However if you are doing it purely for sh*ts and giggles, then why not?  There is something quite satisfying, and aesthetically pleasing, about a nicely set symmetric kite.  And to do it singlehanded, be that on a Cadet, Fireball or a 40ft cruiser, well, it's still an achievement. 

Probably will just end up with a mess of extra ropes and poles which looks ugly and functions sporadically. When up symmetrical kites take a lot of attention to fly well, all of which will detract from steering, balancing the boat and trimming the main. 

Turnturtle is correct, it can be satisfying and is an achievement. But make no mistake; there is nothing more amateur looking than a boat wrestling with a flogging kite whilst all other fundamentals are ignored, then getting it set, accelerating a fraction of a knot before immediately running out of water and starting the struggle to get the thing back in the boat again. 

If I had to choose a kite for a single handed it would definitely be a single line launch and retrieve asymmetric... even then I think it's a bit of distraction. 

for the boat in question, for racing purposes.... for sure.

for dicking around at the beach and enjoying retirement... bugger it, it would be fun.

Your problem is setting the pole either side of the fore stay. I am not convinced a dangly pole would always find its way to the right side of the fore stay. Easier on a Miracle when you are loading the guy onto the pole "manually" and switching the guy by hand. I assume you dont want to have to walk forward to do that. 

Other issue with a dangly pole for a spinnaker, a spinny pole is much longer than a jib stick! You may have a bit of an issue with deck clearence.

Twin pole maybe with a pump system to deploy the pole (if you could overcome friction)

Thinking about it, I think a sym kite has more chance of filling on the inside of the fore stay during a gybe to, A sym kite moves gybe to gybe rather than flips like an asym

You also may need to think about mast inversion and how that effects the main to

I have seen plenty of Miracles single handed so is possible

J

But, for 'dicking around' on the beach and in Holyhead Bay an assy (and, maybe, a trapeze) will be great fun on the Blaze

And if you ask the club to give you an experimental number, won't that negate any gain?

The inversion comes from the pressure of the kite transferring to the mast through the pole, not at the sheath 

If you think about it, the kite isn't actually attached to the pole. It's attach to the guy which comes from (usually) around your shrouds with twiners on.

The pole forces the leading edge of the kite out in front of the boat. 

The effect lessons the more you square the kite

You wouldn't only be running square with the kite,, you would be using it on reaches too.

Other thing, unless you are in a displacement only boat, running ddw is dog slow (you only really do this when there is very little wind in which case the kite needs 100% attention and is an absolute pain to keep flying.Running DDW means those lovely aerofoil shaped sails you have are stalled out and you may as well dig a square topsail.

You would be much better running with a jib poled out (same goes for small lakes, lots of short legs, much easier to goose the jib rather than the faff of getting a kite up and down

Originally posted by iGRF The class rules state you can fit a kite, but you can't use it racing each other in class events, nothing said about using it to race Lasers & Contenders, who will without a shadow of doubt penalise it if it gets even close.

http://blaze-sailing.org/index.php/component/content/article?id=7:rules" rel="nofollow - No they don't

Originally posted by iGRF I don't actually give a rats arse about handicap results

Yet... you created a programme to calculate a fair one...

Originally posted by iGRF my greatest joy is to win over the water, 1st back to the beach and that ain't going to happen with this little boat without some help and ingenuity. (Or an engine) ;-)

you could actually market it at fat people, creating an illusionary handicap based on a 100kg+ payload, then turn up to a light wind handicap race and completely bandit it with an average weight helmsman. 

But still "e. Only one sail may be used in any contest or series of races, except with the permission of the Race Committee controlling those races." 

Ignore the idea of fitting a trapeze then as you will already have one. But you could add racks and increase the size of the your main if you just want to be faster than contenders over the water (regardless of rules). 

I think the largest gain would be the t-foil though, and it's class legal! 

Those additions will be purely to add a bit of extra interest when the wind isn't up and the race isn't 'till tomorrow.......

An RS Aero 5 can beat a Contender over the water in a F2.... what you need is an older Phantom, with a wire for F3-4+ 

yes, but think of the fat shaming potential you could have.... I can't believe you'd pass up the opportunity for such epic trolling just get your name on the bottom of a meaningless spreadsheet?

Because there is no correlation between making a one design faster around a course and it being more popular?

Jim's point (correct me if wrong) is for a development class the asymmetric was faster in all conditions, even when he expected otherwise. And as the aim of development boats is to develop the fastest boat you can, that's the way it goes. It's relevant to what you're doing because your aim is to go outside of class and develop a faster boat. 

Precisely. Added to which, the bow of the dear old Furball is so low fitting a sprit is difficult to say the least. Whilst originally perhaps not the most aesthetic of designs, the one that was converted was downright fugly. Finally, and I know Grumph doesn’t get this, but there are peeps around who still enjoy the skill of setting, flying and gybing a pole kite.

Fair comment Jim, and there is summat to be said for not having large lumps of lard lumbering around the front of the boat in waves. Twin / auto-launch pole systems also have benefits for smaller or less experienced crews, which is why they've been discussed in the Fireball class recently.

Personally, I enjoy being a dinosaur.

Twin poles make the sym kite far easier to gybe. A mate of mine has a Merlin that I had a ride in a little while back. The poles were pretty much automatic. Pull a string and out they went pre attached to the sheet. The FB would definitely benefit but there would be some short term pain from it.

Like on the F101

Just roll it out for reaching ....

An asymmetric is usually faster to rig, and certainly requires less rigging and ropes around the boat. On the water an asymmetric is easier to launch and set. Which is good if you have inexperienced crew. I think they're two big 'wins' for asymmetric kites beyond pure speed. 

But... 'the asymmetric are faster so better' argument is a red herring. I think for most, the trade off of having to reach back and forth across a small lake or narrow channel is frustrating when the gain and losses are already large (and somewhat random) without this exaggerated separation in the fleet.  Symmetric kites keep the fleet packed together and the racing more intense; which many would consider 'better', especially in club racing with lower numbers. Plus the subtitles of trimming a symmetric kite reward investment of time in the activity. 

I'm a big fan of an asymmetric kite, but having sailed some of the fastest, I can't say it's their speed which is their best feature. They're actually just as great  on small boats where they don't really make the thing much faster around the course (200, feva). In fact, these boats have the two largest nationals in the country. But crucially, this has to be matched packed fleets, and consistent conditions... basically, anytime where making it easier for boats to separate and overtake will make the game more fun.

Anyway... it seems iGRFs query isn't about whether a symmetric will make his racing more fun or engaging,  he just wants to be quicker than an arbitrary maker. The answer is... well, it might be possible, but he'd be better adding the sail area to the main, or in the form of a asymmetric, or making any other of a whole host of changes (including adding a motor) which are no more legal than racing his farr 3.7 with a  spinnaker. 

Perhaps it was because goose winging the kite DDW was quicker, in many conditions,  than sailing the angles and longer distances?

I can't see how swinging the pole and kite to weather is difficult, or conflicts the racing rules or is less tactical.   

Anyhow, I think it's great running DDW and by the lee to the bottom mark and all the "not so hot" asymmetric boats are sailing all over the course not making any gains.

In your opinion Jim but not mine.

I prefer the skill required in flying a sym kite effectively even on the puddle I sail on (when I am not in my D-Zero of course which is very well suited to the water).

So, as long as iGRF can convince the race committee at his club to allow him to race his "Farr 3.7 Plus" in their series' using a spinnaker is perfectly class legal?

I do suspect that rule is to prevent sailors having light wind and strong wind mainsails though, rather than stop the use of spinnakers (though it looks as if it does that too).
 

Why would they ban something solely because it was quicker? 

It was banned because people thought the racing would better without it. 

Originally posted by boatshed   I can't see how swinging the pole and kite to weather is difficult, or conflicts the racing rules or is less tactical.

Have you raced with the SRS? 

I haven't, but can imagine:

Originally posted by boatshed  Anyhow, I think it's great running DDW and by the lee to the bottom mark and all the "not so hot" asymmetric boats are sailing all over the course not making any gains.

fine... but race in a 160 boat nationals when the fleet is packed bow to stern it's nice to spread out a little on the run.  

Like I wrote in my post above, symmetric and asymmetric both have their places, it's not purely about which is faster, but about the type of racing it produces and how that meshes with venue and fleet size.   

none of those are grey areas... they're examples where people see a rule being broken, but asses that it's not making much of difference to performance, so the race is still fair, and seeming as it's weekend fun race they'll let it go.  'no harm no foul' common sense. 

But if any of the above got in the way of the racing being 'fair' or 'fun' then I wouldn't hold it against anyone to protest.   

Racing a boat with an extra sail pretty obviously goes well beyond the above.   

Graeme's points one and two don't usually lead to a difference in boat speed (unless the boat doesn't actually measure or the sail is deliberately built to be faster, usually not the case and both would be blatant cheating were they true).

Points 3, 4 & 5 definitely do make a difference to how fast you complete the course and cannot be allowed if we want to have fair racing.

If the Race Committee assess the "Farr 3.7 Plus" and give it an adjusted handicap and call it a "Not-Farr-outo 3.7" (or is that a batty idea) that would be a reasonable attempt to give everybody a fair chance.

I understood it was the sailors who binned - for the reasons Mozzy cites - it detracted from the racing.

However one urban myth that also bounced around back then was that the RS200 was meant to be a two sail boat - the asymmetric only added as an afterthought for 90's asymmetric marketing bullsh*t.

Whatever though ... the 200 is a marvellous boat and I'd put that down to the sailors and RS equally.

Small point. But I disagree. Yes they definitely make a difference. But if the difference they make is perceived to be insignificant to the result, a lot of people will let it go. 

Plenty of times someone has brushed a mark, or bumped me, or ooched a little too much. But if i don't perceive them to have a made a significant gain through it then I'll consider the result fair and won't protest. You don't need to be cracking on every little rule break in club racing for heavens sake to still get fair race. 

If someone turns up with an extra sail, then well, that's different. 

Not an urban myth: it's true. The asymmetric was added complete with the SRS quite late in the design process.

Which is why iGRFs conspiracy theory makes no sense. Why would RS seek to ban something created themselves? It's not like the SRS was something that sailors came up that then RS had to suppress blah blah blah

And how bizarre to ban it through SIs which only apply to fraction of races the boats compete in? And why have a specific class rule which prohibits the system from being removed from the boat?  Why not make the change in class rules? 

I've been plenty critical of RSs attempts to make changes to the 200 for better marketing in the past, so I'm not here to defend them, but iGRFs 'theory' just makes no sense. But I get the impression he's only throwing the ideas out there for amusement on the inter-webs.

Yeah, look at that cheating bstard. 

TBF I wouldn't disagree but it so rarely happens that way, the brushers, bumpers and oochers (particularly the latter) often are serial offenders. Yeah, if you are pushed onto a mark in the melee or make contact in a 'racing incident' on the odd occasion then lets give and take. If you expect me to ignore frequent breaches (because you regularly push it to the limit) and expect to get away with it every race then I might feel different. We all know who the serial offenders are at our clubs, it's not good to let them get away with it time and time again

And, yes I do know that the difference 3 kg of lead makes is almost insignificant but, as somebody said earlier, we have to have rules, and since we do we should abide by them or it all becomes a nonsense......

I do it quite often in the Spice but, obviously only in the lighter stuff (I can get wiring in 5 or 6 knots with 16 M2 up the stick, add a 22 metre kite and I can stay wiring downwind in similar). TBF the Spice is pretty docile sub F4 so gives a pretty stable platform. Coming from windsurfing you'd think it would be second nature but without the boom in your hands it's a bit like tightrope walking without a pole. It's not that hard though and while the Farr will be a bit more lively I'm sure you'll manage (and it's damn good fun). 

Any way you look at it on a planing hull adding 150% extra sail area is going to go more than 0.4% faster.

Jim C - I know that the IC scene is not my 'specialist subject' so the view I expressed in the reports were really just what I was  seeing for myself, first hand. But after spending  10 days + out on a RiB in Tremadog Bay reporting on the IC pre-worlds/Worlds, I was more impressed by the performance of the new design ICs than I was by the ACs. With the exception of one day which was very light, most of the racing was conducted in what could best be described as a 'good breeze' and whilst the ACs were undoubtedly quick in a straight line downwind,  the gains they made seemed to be wiped out heading back upwind. There were also big losses in time when hoisting and recovering, as many of these were accompanied by a swim or two......

I couldn't make a direct one on one comparison as the ACs did w/l whilst the ICs did triangle sausage and I stress again - I was looking at this as an 'outside reporter' but the performance of the Maas boats, Dragonfly and the Morrisons was - eye catching!

D 

Admittedly I've not tried to master the handling of a kite on a single hander but on two person one wire boats both assy. & sym. the kite adds a whole heap of stability off wind.  

I know on the Contender there a very busy point of sail between power reaching and deep running that it can get very squirrelly. With a kite up that point becomes a lovely easy series of flowing S curves.

First post on this forum but this thread was brought to my attention through FB.

I was the builder and first owner of Farr 3.7 #385. The one with the green gennaker in the video on page 8. Although that is the second owner sailing the boat in that clip.

I built it early 2003 from the class association molds with the intention to run it both in class as a fully measured 3.7, mainsail only, but also with provision to run a fixed prod and gennaker. The inspiration was boat #376, a carbon/foam boat with prod and gennaker built by my then employer Alex at C-Tech.

#385 is fibreglass/epoxy/foam sandwich and came out well under weight. This was a bit of a problem as with the maximum allowable corrector weight on the bulkhead it still was 3kg under. At the 2003 3.7class NZ nationals and AGM it was discussed (#376 carbon boat had the same issue) and agreed we could make up the weight with lead equally distributed inside the prod socket and on the rudder gantry. Hence why #376 was named Lead Mine.

I sailed it in class spec for a season before finishing the gennaker system. I was offered a gennaker made from leftover material by Chris Skinner at Fyfe sails in Auckland. There was no choice, Green it was. It cost me a box of Steinlager. I think Chris should have asked for more.

The gennaker was stowed in a sock on the foredeck reaching back into the cockpit with a continuous halyard retrieval system. I created a new snout that allowed the gennaker to be set and retrieved on either tack under the forestay.

I only once sailed against #376 in gennaker mode and that boat was clearly quicker. I think a slightly more open leech. Mine was a bit choked, but I was also the lighter sailor. 

The boat was much more stable downwind, much less inclined to nosedive and significantly quicker than without the gennaker. I found that with the main backing from the kite I could sail controlling only the gennaker sheet without the main in hand a lot of the time. I could stand further forward on the trapeze. Gybing could at times be a bit messier but not that difficult. I found retrieving the kite was the hardest. Impossible to do from the wire as it required standing in the boat and these boats are not the most stable. So setting up for a mark rounding took a bit more planning and precision.

I did sail against other 3.7's in informal races and the gennaker clearly showed it's advantage downwind. I let a few other people sail the boat and they were generally impressed.

In terms of allowing it as part of the class the only solution I could see was a class split which is not what the class needed. It was fun for mucking about and learning (I was also sailing 12ft skiffs at the time) But it was impractical for existing boats to retrofit a system like this and add unnecessary complexity to a class that is already challenging to sail.

I sold #385 in 2006 before travelling to the UK and Spain to work on AC and Open60 projects as well as a small stint with Kevin Ellway on one of his skiff projects and shore crew for Pindar.

I have done little sailing since, I do miss that boat though. Lots of good memories.

 

Hope that info is applicable to this thread.

Cheers,

Neil.

In testing I sailed against #376 with both boats with the gennaker setups. I was referring to the leech of the gennaker which I felt mine had too much of a hook and caused the main to backwind. #376 seemed to have a looser leech in comparison. This kept the top of the main powered up though. It was enough work keeping the small twitchy gennaker from collapsing the luff while working waves on the reach to really worry about the main. Any extra mainsheet would overpower me in moderate winds so I would just let it go until I needed to gybe.

The other aspect was the massive lee-helm with the kite up. It took a bit to get used to with weather-helm upwind and until the kite was set, then it was constantly pushing the tiller away to aim the boat. A rigid tiller extension was necessary, dropping the tiller at any point resulted in an immediate and catastrophic death gybe.