J24 (Sail No. 4239) Dartmouth |
Laurent Giles 'Jolly Boat' Exeter |
29er GBR 074 Tynemouth |
List classes of boat for sale |
GNAV v's Kicker |
Post Reply | Page <12345> |
Author | ||
neilw
Groupie Joined: 26 Jul 04 Online Status: Offline Posts: 88 |
Post Options
Quote Reply
Topic: GNAV v's Kicker Posted: 11 Sep 08 at 10:37pm |
|
are you talking about the type of traveller on the Finn - also used by OKs and FDs. If so here's one on my Finn
|
||
MikeBz
Really should get out more Joined: 21 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 536 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 11 Sep 08 at 10:57pm | |
Well to be fair I did say "subject to positioning of struts/lowers/gooseneck/heel". But you're right, I didn't consider the inversion that you'll get below the gnav if you have lowers at that point preventing the mast from going forward. As you say that inversion will cause some forward bend above the lowers, but IMO it will be very little - go back to my example of grabbing the mast with both hands and doing the push/pull thing with say 12-18" between the 2 points. Without lowers or strut I still think the gnav will induce less bend than a conventional kicker on a keel-stepped mast (hence a fair distance between the heel and the gooseneck). Mike |
||
Merlinboy
Really should get out more Joined: 03 Jul 06 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 3169 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 11 Sep 08 at 11:16pm | |
Fook me i want one!!! |
||
JimC
Really should get out more Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6649 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 12 Sep 08 at 12:04am | |
*That's* not a wide traveller... *This* is a wide traveller... (apologies for the photo credit YY) Personally I'm no fan of the push kicker* because it messes up one of the more effective bits of sail, puts bend in the mast where I really don't want it, and needs extra long lowers (=more drag) to try and stop it doing so. As someone who's always sailed forward hand I don't really buy the space thing. *I refuse to use the vile V "word" Edited by JimC |
||
craiggo
Really should get out more Joined: 01 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1810 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 12 Sep 08 at 8:16am | |
Perfect illustration Jim,
Come on then Graeme get one of those on your Alto, it'll give Jumanji something to smash his shins into !! |
||
Iain C
Really should get out more Joined: 16 Mar 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1113 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 12 Sep 08 at 8:24am | |
I too am a big fan of the temple vang. Nice and simple, more room for the crew, and all the purchases can be hidden up the side of the centreboard case. However I could only really see it being light, strong and practical on a carbon boom, I guess you could weld one up in alloy but I would not give it long and it will probably weigh a ton. If made in carbon, it must be done right, as in VERY strong, and at just the correct angle, as it's easy to get it wrong and go "block to block", especially if you have a raking rig. You can just see one here on this 12. The white part of the mast up to goosneck height is not mast, it's actually part of the hull, it's called a stump and it's completley devoid of any support such as lowers, and has not broken yet despite our best crashing efforts! The vertical member near the gooseneck is in massive compression and the member sloping back is in tension although obviously does not have to be as strong as long as it's well attached to the boom.
Edited by Iain C |
||
RS700 GBR922 "Wirespeed"
Fireball GBR14474 "Eleven Parsecs" Enterprise GBR21970 Bavaria 32 GBR4755L "Adastra" |
||
Jack Sparrow
Really should get out more Joined: 08 Feb 05 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 2965 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 12 Sep 08 at 8:24am | |
Use Firefox as a browser. Seems to be good for me. I will report back on my 'temple vangs' strength when I finally get the thing on the water. But I am sure Aardvark Issues will vouch for it's strength, it was made by his sister company - Aardspars. ( or should I say farther company?) |
||
G.R.F.
Really should get out more Joined: 10 Aug 08 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 4028 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 12 Sep 08 at 9:03am | |
I must just say, is it me or is that a fabulous spinnaker, dunno what it is about the shot, the lovely curve of the luff or the radial clew but that has to be the nicest spinnaker I believe I've ever noticed. Makes ours a joke by comparison. Anyway back on topic, I think the guy developing the Alto would totally freak if we asked about a traveller like that, but I can see the benefit, we also have this big hoop thing in the middle of the boat like the rs400 yet it's sheeted aft. I did ponder the thought of an aft traveller running over and above the stick tiller thing so the damn sheets don't keep wrapping themselves either around the stick handle or the corner of the stern at the most inopportune moment. We've already changed so much, I worry he'll lose what patience he has, he's concerned about the class not becoming like the 505's and pricing and complicating itself out of the market. I can fully sympathise, given my own confusion even a few months ago I would have looked at that Finn and the brain would have short circuited and I'd have had to walk away in frustration simply at the lack of understanding of what all the ropes do. Now here I am actively looking to complicate things further against all my prejudices regarding such complications, races are after all won and lost more on sailing tactics and ninety percent of that on the start, than any complicated setting or adjustments has always been my opinion. You can lose more places fiddling with an adjustable outhaul or downhaul than you'll ever regain up a beat or down a reach for the difference such adjustments make. But it's such a delightful temptation with a boat where you don't run quite the risk of falling in, having a fiddle and the trauma of that distance race has changed my view - I think. Edited by G.R.F. |
||
craiggo
Really should get out more Joined: 01 Apr 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 1810 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 12 Sep 08 at 10:05am | |
Graeme, get rid of the hoop, as you say if you have a bridled mainsheet onto the transom which is then led along the boom and down into the cockpit there is no need for a hoop.
Regarding the scorpion kickers system I mentioned previously I cant find any photos but here is a sketch (sorry for the lack of artistry its an MS Paint special), effectively a temple vang mounted from the foredeck rather than the boom. wire from prodder to cockpit sole/bulkhead junction ensures that prodder sees no bending only compression. THe prodder is only pinned to the back of the foredeck to allow it to rotate laterally with the boom. Edited by craiggo |
||
JimC
Really should get out more Joined: 17 May 04 Location: United Kingdom Online Status: Offline Posts: 6649 |
Post Options Quote Reply Posted: 12 Sep 08 at 10:27am | |
Note that I'd never use a traveller these days: the old girl only has it because that's how she was built and its also structural. The transom bridle is my preferred solution. I can envisage using a *kicker* on a radiused track, as some leadmines do, but there are formidable engineering challenges. One solution for the bridle/transom corner thing is a bit of shock cord as per 29er/49er.
Temple Vang *and* a stump Iain! I guess I can see why, but I'm not comvinced. Although I'm still in two minds about the temple vang thing anyway: I'd like to see an actual engineering analysis of where the loads go... |
||
Post Reply | Page <12345> |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |