Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting

Expand Messages
  • Graham Norbury
    Jeremy Lines once told me that the Solent stay concept was how the Nic35 was originally rigged. Basically you attach the spare wire-rope genoa halyard to
    Message 1 of 16 , May 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Jeremy Lines once told me that the Solent stay concept was how the Nic35
      was originally rigged. Basically you attach the "spare" wire-rope genoa
      halyard to the rear of the stemhead fitting, hank the storm jib on this
      & raise it using the halyard that exits just below the masthead.

      On Luna Azul we eliminated the heavy wire-rope halyards and replaced
      them with Technora cordage. On the few occasions we needed a storm jib,
      the hi tech Solent stay worked fine, and somewhat surprisingly with bo
      sign of chafe from the bronze sail hanks. I'd say it was a whole lot
      more convenient than installing a true inner forestay, even at the
      expense of having the foot of the sail nearer the bow.

      Graham

      minnehaha64 wrote:
      >
      >
      > Colin,
      >
      > My boat seems to have an inner forestay attachment point in the
      > stemhead fitting, and there is a flange on the forward face of the
      > mast a few inches below the top of the mast. I think these fittings
      > are there for the installation of a "Solent" stay. The advice I've
      > found for the storm jib and storm trysail is they be close to the mast
      > to concentrate the center of effort. Mounting the stay a bit further
      > aft and a bit lower down the mast accomplishes that, but it puts the
      > lower mounting point at a less-massive section of the deck and will
      > require running backs. Everything's a compromise.
      >
      > I've toyed with the idea of moving the forestay, along with furler and
      > headsail back to the Solent mounting points, and installing a Code
      > Zero ahead. Haven't run that by my rigging advisor. Will he laugh at me?
      >
      > Russ
      >
      > --- In campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop"
      > <colinj@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Hi Russ,
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > We have just put an inner forestay fitting on our boat. It is well
      > forward,
      > > between the windlass and about 8 inches back from the existing stay. I
      > > don't know what your plans are but we found that mounting it that far
      > > forward killed two birds with one stone. It is attached high enough
      > on the
      > > mast to avoid the need for running backstays and also is in a very
      > heavily
      > > constructed part of the deck. In the opinion of the yard we used and
      > of the
      > > surveyor who looked at it there is no need to tie in to a point in
      > the hull.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > This said, the fitting is very heavy duty and has a s/s backing plate
      > > underneath which is definitely of the 'no nonsense/bomb proof'
      > variety. We
      > > are yet to try it in anger but I am pretty confident.
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Do you think you might have any problems with anchor chain fouling your
      > > under-deck rigging?
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Rgds
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Colin
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > _____
      > >
      > > From: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > [mailto:campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
      > > Sent: 29 April 2009 23:51
      > > To: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Colin,
      > >
      > > I was considering whether it can serve as a lower attachment point for a
      > > length of wire that would serve as a brace to an attachment point on
      > deck
      > > for an inner forestay. I'm thinking of something like back-to-back
      > pad eyes,
      > > one above and one below, on the deck. The upper pad eye would be the
      > lower
      > > attachment for the inner forestay. Beneath that, a length of 1x19 would
      > > attach to the lower pad eye and run on down to that big fitting.
      > Highfield
      > > levers could make both above- and below-decks wires removable. As
      > long as
      > > the two wires were effectively "in line," much of the rigging forces
      > should
      > > be transmitted to that fitting, only minor force affecting the deck.
      > >
      > > I have submitted this idea to Joe Cooper at Hood Sails, and expect a
      > reply
      > > soon. If I'm off my rocker, said reply will be withering, since Joe
      > is an
      > > Aussie.
      > >
      > > In the list of drawings in the "files" portion of this forum, there's
      > > mention of a CN drawing showing the layout of an inner forestay. Has
      > anyone
      > > ever seen said drawing?
      > >
      > > Russ
      > >
      > > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > It sounds to me like it might be a fitting to attach the 'bitter
      > end' of
      > > > your anchor rode.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > On our boat, hull 225, the fitting is much higher up so that you can
      > > unhook
      > > > it even when the anchor chain is in place so the design may have
      > changed
      > > > over the years.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > It is possible that I have a design drawing for one of the early
      > boats so
      > > > will have a look.
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > What were you thinking of attaching to it?
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Rgds
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > Colin
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > _____
      > > >
      > > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com
      > > > [mailto:campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
      > > > Sent: 28 April 2009 22:45
      > > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
      > > yahoogroups.com
      > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Question re: fitting
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > My boat is hull #99. All the way forward, inside the hull,
      > approximately
      > > at
      > > > the waterline, in the "v" made by the two sides meeting, embedded
      > in the
      > > > fiberglass is some sort of U-bolt or D-ring. Does anyone else have
      > this,
      > > and
      > > > if so, what is it? What is its intended use? Most importantly, is
      > it real
      > > > strong?
      > > >
      > >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >
      > Spam <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=s&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
      > Not spam
      > <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=n&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
      > Forget previous vote
      > <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=f&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
    • Colin Campbell-Dunlop
      Hi Russ, This is all an interesting debate and I note your point about getting the centre of effort of the storm jib as far back as possible. In an ideal
      Message 2 of 16 , May 1, 2009
      • 0 Attachment

        Hi Russ,

         

        This is all an interesting debate and I note your point about getting the centre of effort of the storm jib as far back as possible.  In an ideal world that is what we would do.  However, as you say, compromise is the key and we are planning to get a ‘blade’ type genoa cut to run on the inner stay also.  This would give us good sail shape for upwind stuff over 25 knots or so with the option of going down to the storm jib if it gets really windy.  Our theory is that the ‘blade’ will be balanced on reef 2 of the main and the storm jib on reef three.  We have a trysail and all the kit and caboodle that goes with it but we have never had to put it up the mast. 

         

        Interesting idea re the code zero.  I would not personally want to play around with the fixing points for the forestay as it might upset the balance.  One thing I have considered though is fabricating a stainless bowsprit of about 3-4 feet in length which could be removeable.  We would fly our chute from that but it would also be an excellent fixing point for a furling type code zero or similar.  On a broad reach she would fly with that set up as it would just stop it from getting blanked by the main….is my thought. 

         

        If our sailmaker could read this he would be rubbing his hands with glee. 

         

        On another note, when funds permit I am considering a new main and genoa in Hood Vectron.  Has anyone else had sails made up in this fabric?  I am hearing lots of good things about it.  Very strong, virtually no stretch, very durable, nice to look at, excellent UV stability etc. 

         

        Rgds

         

        Colin

         

        Trutz 35/225

         


        From: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com [mailto: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
        Sent: 01 May 2009 00:46
        To: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting

         




        Colin,

        My boat seems to have an inner forestay attachment point in the stemhead fitting, and there is a flange on the forward face of the mast a few inches below the top of the mast. I think these fittings are there for the installation of a " Solent " stay. The advice I've found for the storm jib and storm trysail is they be close to the mast to concentrate the center of effort. Mounting the stay a bit further aft and a bit lower down the mast accomplishes that, but it puts the lower mounting point at a less-massive section of the deck and will require running backs. Everything's a compromise.

        I've toyed with the idea of moving the forestay, along with furler and headsail back to the Solent mounting points, and installing a Code Zero ahead. Haven't run that by my rigging advisor. Will he laugh at me?

        Russ

        --- In campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@...> wrote:

        >
        > Hi Russ,
        >
        >
        >
        > We have just put an inner forestay fitting on our boat. It is well
        forward,
        > between the windlass and about 8 inches back from the existing stay. I
        > don't know what your plans are but we found that mounting it that far
        > forward killed two birds with one stone. It is attached high enough on the
        > mast to avoid the need for running backstays and also is in a very heavily
        > constructed part of the deck. In the opinion of the yard we used and of
        the
        > surveyor who looked at it there is no need to tie in to a point in the
        hull.
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > This said, the fitting is very heavy duty and has a s/s backing plate
        > underneath which is definitely of the 'no nonsense/bomb proof' variety. We
        > are yet to try it in anger but I am pretty confident.
        >
        >
        >
        > Do you think you might have any problems with anchor chain fouling your
        > under-deck rigging?
        >
        >
        >
        > Rgds
        >
        >
        >
        > Colin
        >
        >
        >
        > _____
        >
        > From: campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com
        > [mailto:campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com]
        On Behalf Of minnehaha64
        > Sent: 29 April 2009 23:51
        > To: campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com
        > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > Colin,
        >
        > I was considering whether it can serve as a lower attachment point for a
        > length of wire that would serve as a brace to an attachment point on deck
        > for an inner forestay. I'm thinking of something like back-to-back pad
        eyes,
        > one above and one below, on the deck. The upper pad eye would be the lower
        > attachment for the inner forestay. Beneath that, a length of 1x19 would
        > attach to the lower pad eye and run on down to that big fitting. Highfield
        > levers could make both above- and below-decks wires removable. As long as
        > the two wires were effectively "in line," much of the rigging forces
        should
        > be transmitted to that fitting, only minor force affecting the deck.
        >
        > I have submitted this idea to Joe Cooper at Hood Sails, and expect a reply
        > soon. If I'm off my rocker, said reply will be withering, since Joe is an
        > Aussie.
        >
        > In the list of drawings in the "files" portion of this forum,
        there's
        > mention of a CN drawing showing the layout of an inner forestay. Has
        anyone
        > ever seen said drawing?
        >
        > Russ
        >
        > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
        > yahoogroups. com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@>
        wrote:
        > >
        > > It sounds to me like it might be a fitting to attach the 'bitter end'
        of
        > > your anchor rode.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > On our boat, hull 225, the fitting is much higher up so that you can
        > unhook
        > > it even when the anchor chain is in place so the design may have
        changed
        > > over the years.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > It is possible that I have a design drawing for one of the early
        boats so
        > > will have a look.
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > What were you thinking of attaching to it?
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Rgds
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Colin
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > _____
        > >
        > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
        > yahoogroups. com
        > > [mailto:campernicho lson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
        > yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
        > > Sent: 28 April 2009 22:45
        > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
        > yahoogroups. com
        > > Subject: [campernicholson] Question re: fitting
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > My boat is hull #99. All the way forward, inside the hull,
        approximately
        > at
        > > the waterline, in the "v" made by the two sides meeting,
        embedded in the
        > > fiberglass is some sort of U-bolt or D-ring. Does anyone else have
        this,
        > and
        > > if so, what is it? What is its intended use? Most importantly, is it
        real
        > > strong?
        > >
        >

      • minnehaha64
        Graham, et al, Well, that s it. I ve been pounded into submission by the irrefutable logic and experience of my fellow Nickophiles (Nick-heads?
        Message 3 of 16 , May 1, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Graham, et al,

          Well, that's it. I've been pounded into submission by the irrefutable logic and experience of my fellow Nickophiles (Nick-heads? Nick-o-lodians?). Also re-read an article from the May/June issue of Ocean Navigator on this issue, plus a piece written by Joe Cooper. Using the solent to hoist the storm jib seems to be by far the simplest way to proceed, and everyone seems to say that it works just fine. Not to mention, the $$$ being spend on the ssb are largely for the purpose of being able to avoid bad weather in the first place.

          In addition, the solent stay could be used to fly twin Genoas downwind, or as Colin notes in the next message, a smallish "blade" beating in heavier air. This forum certainly serves a purpose; there's comfort in numbers. We might all be wrong, but we'll all be wrong together . . . and then our wives can't blame us.

          Russ

          --- In campernicholson@yahoogroups.com, Graham Norbury <gnorbury@...> wrote:
          >
          > Jeremy Lines once told me that the Solent stay concept was how the Nic35
          > was originally rigged. Basically you attach the "spare" wire-rope genoa
          > halyard to the rear of the stemhead fitting, hank the storm jib on this
          > & raise it using the halyard that exits just below the masthead.
          >
          > On Luna Azul we eliminated the heavy wire-rope halyards and replaced
          > them with Technora cordage. On the few occasions we needed a storm jib,
          > the hi tech Solent stay worked fine, and somewhat surprisingly with bo
          > sign of chafe from the bronze sail hanks. I'd say it was a whole lot
          > more convenient than installing a true inner forestay, even at the
          > expense of having the foot of the sail nearer the bow.
          >
          > Graham
          >
          > minnehaha64 wrote:
          > >
          > >
          > > Colin,
          > >
          > > My boat seems to have an inner forestay attachment point in the
          > > stemhead fitting, and there is a flange on the forward face of the
          > > mast a few inches below the top of the mast. I think these fittings
          > > are there for the installation of a "Solent" stay. The advice I've
          > > found for the storm jib and storm trysail is they be close to the mast
          > > to concentrate the center of effort. Mounting the stay a bit further
          > > aft and a bit lower down the mast accomplishes that, but it puts the
          > > lower mounting point at a less-massive section of the deck and will
          > > require running backs. Everything's a compromise.
          > >
          > > I've toyed with the idea of moving the forestay, along with furler and
          > > headsail back to the Solent mounting points, and installing a Code
          > > Zero ahead. Haven't run that by my rigging advisor. Will he laugh at me?
          > >
          > > Russ
          > >
          > > --- In campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
          > > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop"
          > > <colinj@> wrote:
          > > >
          > > > Hi Russ,
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > We have just put an inner forestay fitting on our boat. It is well
          > > forward,
          > > > between the windlass and about 8 inches back from the existing stay. I
          > > > don't know what your plans are but we found that mounting it that far
          > > > forward killed two birds with one stone. It is attached high enough
          > > on the
          > > > mast to avoid the need for running backstays and also is in a very
          > > heavily
          > > > constructed part of the deck. In the opinion of the yard we used and
          > > of the
          > > > surveyor who looked at it there is no need to tie in to a point in
          > > the hull.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > This said, the fitting is very heavy duty and has a s/s backing plate
          > > > underneath which is definitely of the 'no nonsense/bomb proof'
          > > variety. We
          > > > are yet to try it in anger but I am pretty confident.
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Do you think you might have any problems with anchor chain fouling your
          > > > under-deck rigging?
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Rgds
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Colin
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > _____
          > > >
          > > > From: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
          > > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > [mailto:campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
          > > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
          > > > Sent: 29 April 2009 23:51
          > > > To: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
          > > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > >
          > > > Colin,
          > > >
          > > > I was considering whether it can serve as a lower attachment point for a
          > > > length of wire that would serve as a brace to an attachment point on
          > > deck
          > > > for an inner forestay. I'm thinking of something like back-to-back
          > > pad eyes,
          > > > one above and one below, on the deck. The upper pad eye would be the
          > > lower
          > > > attachment for the inner forestay. Beneath that, a length of 1x19 would
          > > > attach to the lower pad eye and run on down to that big fitting.
          > > Highfield
          > > > levers could make both above- and below-decks wires removable. As
          > > long as
          > > > the two wires were effectively "in line," much of the rigging forces
          > > should
          > > > be transmitted to that fitting, only minor force affecting the deck.
          > > >
          > > > I have submitted this idea to Joe Cooper at Hood Sails, and expect a
          > > reply
          > > > soon. If I'm off my rocker, said reply will be withering, since Joe
          > > is an
          > > > Aussie.
          > > >
          > > > In the list of drawings in the "files" portion of this forum, there's
          > > > mention of a CN drawing showing the layout of an inner forestay. Has
          > > anyone
          > > > ever seen said drawing?
          > > >
          > > > Russ
          > > >
          > > > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > yahoogroups.com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@> wrote:
          > > > >
          > > > > It sounds to me like it might be a fitting to attach the 'bitter
          > > end' of
          > > > > your anchor rode.
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > On our boat, hull 225, the fitting is much higher up so that you can
          > > > unhook
          > > > > it even when the anchor chain is in place so the design may have
          > > changed
          > > > > over the years.
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > It is possible that I have a design drawing for one of the early
          > > boats so
          > > > > will have a look.
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > What were you thinking of attaching to it?
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > Rgds
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > Colin
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > _____
          > > > >
          > > > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > yahoogroups.com
          > > > > [mailto:campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
          > > > > Sent: 28 April 2009 22:45
          > > > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
          > > > yahoogroups.com
          > > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Question re: fitting
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > >
          > > > > My boat is hull #99. All the way forward, inside the hull,
          > > approximately
          > > > at
          > > > > the waterline, in the "v" made by the two sides meeting, embedded
          > > in the
          > > > > fiberglass is some sort of U-bolt or D-ring. Does anyone else have
          > > this,
          > > > and
          > > > > if so, what is it? What is its intended use? Most importantly, is
          > > it real
          > > > > strong?
          > > > >
          > > >
          > >
          > >
          > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          > >
          > > Spam <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=s&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
          > > Not spam
          > > <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=n&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
          > > Forget previous vote
          > > <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=f&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
          >
        • minnehaha64
          Colin, See my previous response to Graham Norbury, in which I capitulate to group wisdom (a phrase which, in politics, is usually an oxymoron). I like your
          Message 4 of 16 , May 1, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Colin,

            See my previous response to Graham Norbury, in which I capitulate to "group wisdom" (a phrase which, in politics, is usually an oxymoron). I like your idea about a smallish blade. My prior owner had the original CN sails refurbished shortly before he replaced the mast with a taller one. There's a #3 hank-on jib in my inventory which just might be perfect.

            Re your trysail: Does it hang close to the mast, or toward the aft end of the boom? Did you add a storm track to the mast?

            I did a bit more research on the Code Zero. Beth Leonard and Evans Starzinger advocated using it for cruising in a seminar I attended a few years back. Checking their website, I see that they use it only on a very close reach in light winds. Since there are a lot of zeroes in the price of that particular sail, and it seems to have been developed more for racing, I'll probably forego that purchase for a while.

            I had new sails made from Hood Vectron two years ago. I've also, as you know, spent most of the last two years on the hard, primarily with a busted engine, so I have yet to be able to evaluate them very much. We did sail them for one long, beautiful day last spring and liked them very much. Joe Cooper at Hood in Newport, R.I. is a delight to work with. Maybe you can get a fleet discount!

            Russ

            --- In campernicholson@yahoogroups.com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@...> wrote:
            >
            > Hi Russ,
            >
            >
            >
            > This is all an interesting debate and I note your point about getting the
            > centre of effort of the storm jib as far back as possible. In an ideal
            > world that is what we would do. However, as you say, compromise is the key
            > and we are planning to get a 'blade' type genoa cut to run on the inner stay
            > also. This would give us good sail shape for upwind stuff over 25 knots or
            > so with the option of going down to the storm jib if it gets really windy.
            > Our theory is that the 'blade' will be balanced on reef 2 of the main and
            > the storm jib on reef three. We have a trysail and all the kit and caboodle
            > that goes with it but we have never had to put it up the mast.
            >
            >
            >
            > Interesting idea re the code zero. I would not personally want to play
            > around with the fixing points for the forestay as it might upset the
            > balance. One thing I have considered though is fabricating a stainless
            > bowsprit of about 3-4 feet in length which could be removeable. We would
            > fly our chute from that but it would also be an excellent fixing point for a
            > furling type code zero or similar. On a broad reach she would fly with that
            > set up as it would just stop it from getting blanked by the main..is my
            > thought.
            >
            >
            >
            > If our sailmaker could read this he would be rubbing his hands with glee.
            >
            >
            >
            > On another note, when funds permit I am considering a new main and genoa in
            > Hood Vectron. Has anyone else had sails made up in this fabric? I am
            > hearing lots of good things about it. Very strong, virtually no stretch,
            > very durable, nice to look at, excellent UV stability etc.
            >
            >
            >
            > Rgds
            >
            >
            >
            > Colin
            >
            >
            >
            > Trutz 35/225
            >
            >
            >
            > _____
            >
            > From: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
            > [mailto:campernicholson@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
            > Sent: 01 May 2009 00:46
            > To: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Colin,
            >
            > My boat seems to have an inner forestay attachment point in the stemhead
            > fitting, and there is a flange on the forward face of the mast a few inches
            > below the top of the mast. I think these fittings are there for the
            > installation of a "Solent" stay. The advice I've found for the storm jib and
            > storm trysail is they be close to the mast to concentrate the center of
            > effort. Mounting the stay a bit further aft and a bit lower down the mast
            > accomplishes that, but it puts the lower mounting point at a less-massive
            > section of the deck and will require running backs. Everything's a
            > compromise.
            >
            > I've toyed with the idea of moving the forestay, along with furler and
            > headsail back to the Solent mounting points, and installing a Code Zero
            > ahead. Haven't run that by my rigging advisor. Will he laugh at me?
            >
            > Russ
            >
            > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
            > yahoogroups.com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@> wrote:
            > >
            > > Hi Russ,
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > We have just put an inner forestay fitting on our boat. It is well
            > forward,
            > > between the windlass and about 8 inches back from the existing stay. I
            > > don't know what your plans are but we found that mounting it that far
            > > forward killed two birds with one stone. It is attached high enough on the
            > > mast to avoid the need for running backstays and also is in a very heavily
            > > constructed part of the deck. In the opinion of the yard we used and of
            > the
            > > surveyor who looked at it there is no need to tie in to a point in the
            > hull.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > This said, the fitting is very heavy duty and has a s/s backing plate
            > > underneath which is definitely of the 'no nonsense/bomb proof' variety. We
            > > are yet to try it in anger but I am pretty confident.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Do you think you might have any problems with anchor chain fouling your
            > > under-deck rigging?
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Rgds
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Colin
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > _____
            > >
            > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
            > yahoogroups.com
            > > [mailto:campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
            > yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
            > > Sent: 29 April 2009 23:51
            > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
            > yahoogroups.com
            > > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Colin,
            > >
            > > I was considering whether it can serve as a lower attachment point for a
            > > length of wire that would serve as a brace to an attachment point on deck
            > > for an inner forestay. I'm thinking of something like back-to-back pad
            > eyes,
            > > one above and one below, on the deck. The upper pad eye would be the lower
            > > attachment for the inner forestay. Beneath that, a length of 1x19 would
            > > attach to the lower pad eye and run on down to that big fitting. Highfield
            > > levers could make both above- and below-decks wires removable. As long as
            > > the two wires were effectively "in line," much of the rigging forces
            > should
            > > be transmitted to that fitting, only minor force affecting the deck.
            > >
            > > I have submitted this idea to Joe Cooper at Hood Sails, and expect a reply
            > > soon. If I'm off my rocker, said reply will be withering, since Joe is an
            > > Aussie.
            > >
            > > In the list of drawings in the "files" portion of this forum, there's
            > > mention of a CN drawing showing the layout of an inner forestay. Has
            > anyone
            > > ever seen said drawing?
            > >
            > > Russ
            > >
            > > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
            > > yahoogroups.com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@> wrote:
            > > >
            > > > It sounds to me like it might be a fitting to attach the 'bitter end' of
            > > > your anchor rode.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > On our boat, hull 225, the fitting is much higher up so that you can
            > > unhook
            > > > it even when the anchor chain is in place so the design may have changed
            > > > over the years.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > It is possible that I have a design drawing for one of the early boats
            > so
            > > > will have a look.
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > What were you thinking of attaching to it?
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Rgds
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > Colin
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > _____
            > > >
            > > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
            > > yahoogroups.com
            > > > [mailto:campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
            > > yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
            > > > Sent: 28 April 2009 22:45
            > > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
            > > yahoogroups.com
            > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Question re: fitting
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > >
            > > > My boat is hull #99. All the way forward, inside the hull, approximately
            > > at
            > > > the waterline, in the "v" made by the two sides meeting, embedded in the
            > > > fiberglass is some sort of U-bolt or D-ring. Does anyone else have this,
            > > and
            > > > if so, what is it? What is its intended use? Most importantly, is it
            > real
            > > > strong?
            > > >
            > >
            >
          • Colin Campbell-Dunlop
            Dear Russ, Thanks for the input on all of this it is very helpful. Pleased to hear that you have had a good experience so far with your Vektron sails. They
            Message 5 of 16 , May 1, 2009
            • 0 Attachment

              Dear Russ,

               

              Thanks for the input on all of this it is very helpful.  Pleased to hear that you have had a good experience so far with your Vektron sails.  They certainly seem to tick quite a few boxes so if I can justify the cost this year I will go for it.  More likely next season though if I am truthful. 

               

              Our trysail has a dedicated track on the aft starboard side of the mast.  It starts just above the gooseneck and goes right up beyond the spreaders.  It is heavy gauge aluminium track to fit the equally heavy gauge slides on the sail.  The plan is to drop the boom down and lash it off.  The sail then sheets via blocks on the quarters back to a cleat or strong point in the cockpit.  This is all theory though as we haven’t put the thing up in five years of ownership.  It was on board when we bought the boat!

               

              Good luck with getting everything fixed up and have a great season. 

               

              Rgds

               

              Colin

               


              From: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com [mailto: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
              Sent: 01 May 2009 15:18
              To: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting

               




              Colin,

              See my previous response to Graham Norbury, in which I capitulate to "group wisdom" (a phrase which, in politics, is usually an oxymoron). I like your idea about a smallish blade. My prior owner had the original CN sails refurbished shortly before he replaced the mast with a taller one. There's a #3 hank-on jib in my inventory which just might be perfect.

              Re your trysail: Does it hang close to the mast, or toward the aft end of the boom? Did you add a storm track to the mast?

              I did a bit more research on the Code Zero. Beth Leonard and Evans Starzinger advocated using it for cruising in a seminar I attended a few years back. Checking their website, I see that they use it only on a very close reach in light winds. Since there are a lot of zeroes in the price of that particular sail, and it seems to have been developed more for racing, I'll probably forego that purchase for a while.

              I had new sails made from Hood Vectron two years ago. I've also, as you know, spent most of the last two years on the hard, primarily with a busted engine, so I have yet to be able to evaluate them very much. We did sail them for one long, beautiful day last spring and liked them very much. Joe Cooper at Hood in Newport , R.I. is a delight to work with. Maybe you can get a fleet discount!

              Russ

              --- In campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@...> wrote:

              >
              > Hi Russ,
              >
              >
              >
              > This is all an interesting debate and I note your point about getting the
              > centre of effort of the storm jib as far back as possible. In an ideal
              > world that is what we would do. However, as you say, compromise is the key
              > and we are planning to get a 'blade' type genoa cut to run on the inner
              stay
              > also. This would give us good sail shape for upwind stuff over 25 knots or
              > so with the option of going down to the storm jib if it gets really windy.
              > Our theory is that the 'blade' will be balanced on reef 2 of the main and
              > the storm jib on reef three. We have a trysail and all the kit and
              caboodle
              > that goes with it but we have never had to put it up the mast.
              >
              >
              >
              > Interesting idea re the code zero. I would not personally want to play
              > around with the fixing points for the forestay as it might upset the
              > balance. One thing I have considered though is fabricating a stainless
              > bowsprit of about 3-4 feet in length which could be removeable. We would
              > fly our chute from that but it would also be an excellent fixing point for
              a
              > furling type code zero or similar. On a broad reach she would fly with
              that
              > set up as it would just stop it from getting blanked by the main..is my
              > thought.
              >
              >
              >
              > If our sailmaker could read this he would be rubbing his hands with glee.
              >
              >
              >
              > On another note, when funds permit I am considering a new main and genoa
              in
              > Hood Vectron. Has anyone else had sails made up in this fabric? I am
              > hearing lots of good things about it. Very strong, virtually no stretch,
              > very durable, nice to look at, excellent UV stability etc.
              >
              >
              >
              > Rgds
              >
              >
              >
              > Colin
              >
              >
              >
              > Trutz 35/225
              >
              >
              >
              > _____
              >
              > From: campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com
              > [mailto:campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com]
              On Behalf Of minnehaha64
              > Sent: 01 May 2009 00:46
              > To: campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com
              > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Colin,
              >
              > My boat seems to have an inner forestay attachment point in the stemhead
              > fitting, and there is a flange on the forward face of the mast a few
              inches
              > below the top of the mast. I think these fittings are there for the
              > installation of a " Solent "
              stay. The advice I've found for the storm jib and
              > storm trysail is they be close to the mast to concentrate the center of
              > effort. Mounting the stay a bit further aft and a bit lower down the mast
              > accomplishes that, but it puts the lower mounting point at a less-massive
              > section of the deck and will require running backs. Everything's a
              > compromise.
              >
              > I've toyed with the idea of moving the forestay, along with furler and
              > headsail back to the Solent mounting
              points, and installing a Code Zero
              > ahead. Haven't run that by my rigging advisor. Will he laugh at me?
              >
              > Russ
              >
              > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
              > yahoogroups. com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@>
              wrote:
              > >
              > > Hi Russ,
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > We have just put an inner forestay fitting on our boat. It is well
              > forward,
              > > between the windlass and about 8 inches back from the existing stay.
              I
              > > don't know what your plans are but we found that mounting it that far
              > > forward killed two birds with one stone. It is attached high enough
              on the
              > > mast to avoid the need for running backstays and also is in a very
              heavily
              > > constructed part of the deck. In the opinion of the yard we used and
              of
              > the
              > > surveyor who looked at it there is no need to tie in to a point in
              the
              > hull.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > This said, the fitting is very heavy duty and has a s/s backing plate
              > > underneath which is definitely of the 'no nonsense/bomb proof' variety.
              We
              > > are yet to try it in anger but I am pretty confident.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Do you think you might have any problems with anchor chain fouling
              your
              > > under-deck rigging?
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Rgds
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Colin
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > _____
              > >
              > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
              > yahoogroups. com
              > > [mailto:campernicho lson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
              > yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
              > > Sent: 29 April 2009 23:51
              > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
              > yahoogroups. com
              > > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Colin,
              > >
              > > I was considering whether it can serve as a lower attachment point
              for a
              > > length of wire that would serve as a brace to an attachment point on
              deck
              > > for an inner forestay. I'm thinking of something like back-to-back
              pad
              > eyes,
              > > one above and one below, on the deck. The upper pad eye would be the
              lower
              > > attachment for the inner forestay. Beneath that, a length of 1x19
              would
              > > attach to the lower pad eye and run on down to that big fitting.
              Highfield
              > > levers could make both above- and below-decks wires removable. As
              long as
              > > the two wires were effectively "in line," much of the
              rigging forces
              > should
              > > be transmitted to that fitting, only minor force affecting the deck.
              > >
              > > I have submitted this idea to Joe Cooper at Hood Sails, and expect a
              reply
              > > soon. If I'm off my rocker, said reply will be withering, since Joe
              is an
              > > Aussie.
              > >
              > > In the list of drawings in the "files" portion of this
              forum, there's
              > > mention of a CN drawing showing the layout of an inner forestay. Has
              > anyone
              > > ever seen said drawing?
              > >
              > > Russ
              > >
              > > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
              > > yahoogroups. com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop"
              <colinj@> wrote:
              > > >
              > > > It sounds to me like it might be a fitting to attach the 'bitter
              end' of
              > > > your anchor rode.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > On our boat, hull 225, the fitting is much higher up so that you
              can
              > > unhook
              > > > it even when the anchor chain is in place so the design may have
              changed
              > > > over the years.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > It is possible that I have a design drawing for one of the early
              boats
              > so
              > > > will have a look.
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > What were you thinking of attaching to it?
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > Rgds
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > Colin
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > _____
              > > >
              > > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
              > > yahoogroups. com
              > > > [mailto:campernicho lson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
              > > yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
              > > > Sent: 28 April 2009 22:45
              > > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
              > > yahoogroups. com
              > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Question re: fitting
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > >
              > > > My boat is hull #99. All the way forward, inside the hull,
              approximately
              > > at
              > > > the waterline, in the "v" made by the two sides
              meeting, embedded in the
              > > > fiberglass is some sort of U-bolt or D-ring. Does anyone else
              have this,
              > > and
              > > > if so, what is it? What is its intended use? Most importantly,
              is it
              > real
              > > > strong?
              > > >
              > >
              >

            • mumeskara
              Nick-o-lodians is my favourite!
              Message 6 of 16 , May 1, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Nick-o-lodians is my favourite!


                --- In campernicholson@yahoogroups.com, "minnehaha64" <russ.armstrong@...> wrote:
                >
                > Graham, et al,
                >
                > Well, that's it. I've been pounded into submission by the irrefutable logic and experience of my fellow Nickophiles (Nick-heads? Nick-o-lodians?). Also re-read an article from the May/June issue of Ocean Navigator on this issue, plus a piece written by Joe Cooper. Using the solent to hoist the storm jib seems to be by far the simplest way to proceed, and everyone seems to say that it works just fine. Not to mention, the $$$ being spend on the ssb are largely for the purpose of being able to avoid bad weather in the first place.
                >
                > In addition, the solent stay could be used to fly twin Genoas downwind, or as Colin notes in the next message, a smallish "blade" beating in heavier air. This forum certainly serves a purpose; there's comfort in numbers. We might all be wrong, but we'll all be wrong together . . . and then our wives can't blame us.
                >
                > Russ
                >
                > --- In campernicholson@yahoogroups.com, Graham Norbury <gnorbury@> wrote:
                > >
                > > Jeremy Lines once told me that the Solent stay concept was how the Nic35
                > > was originally rigged. Basically you attach the "spare" wire-rope genoa
                > > halyard to the rear of the stemhead fitting, hank the storm jib on this
                > > & raise it using the halyard that exits just below the masthead.
                > >
                > > On Luna Azul we eliminated the heavy wire-rope halyards and replaced
                > > them with Technora cordage. On the few occasions we needed a storm jib,
                > > the hi tech Solent stay worked fine, and somewhat surprisingly with bo
                > > sign of chafe from the bronze sail hanks. I'd say it was a whole lot
                > > more convenient than installing a true inner forestay, even at the
                > > expense of having the foot of the sail nearer the bow.
                > >
                > > Graham
                > >
                > > minnehaha64 wrote:
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > Colin,
                > > >
                > > > My boat seems to have an inner forestay attachment point in the
                > > > stemhead fitting, and there is a flange on the forward face of the
                > > > mast a few inches below the top of the mast. I think these fittings
                > > > are there for the installation of a "Solent" stay. The advice I've
                > > > found for the storm jib and storm trysail is they be close to the mast
                > > > to concentrate the center of effort. Mounting the stay a bit further
                > > > aft and a bit lower down the mast accomplishes that, but it puts the
                > > > lower mounting point at a less-massive section of the deck and will
                > > > require running backs. Everything's a compromise.
                > > >
                > > > I've toyed with the idea of moving the forestay, along with furler and
                > > > headsail back to the Solent mounting points, and installing a Code
                > > > Zero ahead. Haven't run that by my rigging advisor. Will he laugh at me?
                > > >
                > > > Russ
                > > >
                > > > --- In campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
                > > > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop"
                > > > <colinj@> wrote:
                > > > >
                > > > > Hi Russ,
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > We have just put an inner forestay fitting on our boat. It is well
                > > > forward,
                > > > > between the windlass and about 8 inches back from the existing stay. I
                > > > > don't know what your plans are but we found that mounting it that far
                > > > > forward killed two birds with one stone. It is attached high enough
                > > > on the
                > > > > mast to avoid the need for running backstays and also is in a very
                > > > heavily
                > > > > constructed part of the deck. In the opinion of the yard we used and
                > > > of the
                > > > > surveyor who looked at it there is no need to tie in to a point in
                > > > the hull.
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > This said, the fitting is very heavy duty and has a s/s backing plate
                > > > > underneath which is definitely of the 'no nonsense/bomb proof'
                > > > variety. We
                > > > > are yet to try it in anger but I am pretty confident.
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Do you think you might have any problems with anchor chain fouling your
                > > > > under-deck rigging?
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Rgds
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Colin
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > _____
                > > > >
                > > > > From: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
                > > > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
                > > > > [mailto:campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
                > > > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
                > > > > Sent: 29 April 2009 23:51
                > > > > To: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
                > > > <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
                > > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > >
                > > > > Colin,
                > > > >
                > > > > I was considering whether it can serve as a lower attachment point for a
                > > > > length of wire that would serve as a brace to an attachment point on
                > > > deck
                > > > > for an inner forestay. I'm thinking of something like back-to-back
                > > > pad eyes,
                > > > > one above and one below, on the deck. The upper pad eye would be the
                > > > lower
                > > > > attachment for the inner forestay. Beneath that, a length of 1x19 would
                > > > > attach to the lower pad eye and run on down to that big fitting.
                > > > Highfield
                > > > > levers could make both above- and below-decks wires removable. As
                > > > long as
                > > > > the two wires were effectively "in line," much of the rigging forces
                > > > should
                > > > > be transmitted to that fitting, only minor force affecting the deck.
                > > > >
                > > > > I have submitted this idea to Joe Cooper at Hood Sails, and expect a
                > > > reply
                > > > > soon. If I'm off my rocker, said reply will be withering, since Joe
                > > > is an
                > > > > Aussie.
                > > > >
                > > > > In the list of drawings in the "files" portion of this forum, there's
                > > > > mention of a CN drawing showing the layout of an inner forestay. Has
                > > > anyone
                > > > > ever seen said drawing?
                > > > >
                > > > > Russ
                > > > >
                > > > > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
                > > > > yahoogroups.com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@> wrote:
                > > > > >
                > > > > > It sounds to me like it might be a fitting to attach the 'bitter
                > > > end' of
                > > > > > your anchor rode.
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > On our boat, hull 225, the fitting is much higher up so that you can
                > > > > unhook
                > > > > > it even when the anchor chain is in place so the design may have
                > > > changed
                > > > > > over the years.
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > It is possible that I have a design drawing for one of the early
                > > > boats so
                > > > > > will have a look.
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > What were you thinking of attaching to it?
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Rgds
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > Colin
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > _____
                > > > > >
                > > > > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
                > > > > yahoogroups.com
                > > > > > [mailto:campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
                > > > > yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
                > > > > > Sent: 28 April 2009 22:45
                > > > > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicholson%40yahoogroups.com>
                > > > > yahoogroups.com
                > > > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Question re: fitting
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > >
                > > > > > My boat is hull #99. All the way forward, inside the hull,
                > > > approximately
                > > > > at
                > > > > > the waterline, in the "v" made by the two sides meeting, embedded
                > > > in the
                > > > > > fiberglass is some sort of U-bolt or D-ring. Does anyone else have
                > > > this,
                > > > > and
                > > > > > if so, what is it? What is its intended use? Most importantly, is
                > > > it real
                > > > > > strong?
                > > > > >
                > > > >
                > > >
                > > >
                > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                > > >
                > > > Spam <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=s&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
                > > > Not spam
                > > > <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=n&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
                > > > Forget previous vote
                > > > <http://mailshield.cosmoweb.net/b.php?c=f&i=174573333&m=2f42a58a7ea0>
                > >
                >
              • Denece
                Hey! I resemble that statement! Denece -----Original Message----- From: minnehaha64 Sent: May 1, 2009 10:00 AM To: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com Subject:
                Message 7 of 16 , May 1, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hey! I resemble that statement!
                  Denece


                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: minnehaha64
                  Sent: May 1, 2009 10:00 AM
                  To: campernicholson@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting



                  Graham, et al,

                  Well, that's it. I've been pounded into submission by the irrefutable logic and experience of my fellow Nickophiles (Nick-heads? Nick-o-lodians? ). Also re-read an article from the May/June issue of Ocean Navigator on this issue, plus a piece written by Joe Cooper. Using the solent to hoist the storm jib seems to be by far the simplest way to proceed, and everyone seems to say that it works just fine. Not to mention, the $$$ being spend on the ssb are largely for the purpose of being able to avoid bad weather in the first place.

                  In addition, the solent stay could be used to fly twin Genoas downwind, or as Colin notes in the next message, a smallish "blade" beating in heavier air. This forum certainly serves a purpose; there's comfort in numbers. We might all be wrong, but we'll all be wrong together . . . and then our wives can't blame us.

                  Russ

                  --- In campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com, Graham Norbury <gnorbury@.. .> wrote:
                  >
                  > Jeremy Lines once told me that the Solent stay concept was how the Nic35
                  > was originally rigged. Basically you attach the "spare" wire-rope genoa
                  > halyard to the rear of the stemhead fitting, hank the storm jib on this
                  > & raise it using the halyard that exits just below the masthead.
                  >
                  > On Luna Azul we eliminated the heavy wire-rope halyards and replaced
                  > them with Technora cordage. On the few occasions we needed a storm jib,
                  > the hi tech Solent stay worked fine, and somewhat surprisingly with bo
                  > sign of chafe from the bronze sail hanks. I'd say it was a whole lot
                  > more convenient than installing a true inner forestay, even at the
                  > expense of having the foot of the sail nearer the bow.
                  >
                  > Graham
                  >
                  > minnehaha64 wrote:
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Colin,
                  > >
                  > > My boat seems to have an inner forestay attachment point in the
                  > > stemhead fitting, and there is a flange on the forward face of the
                  > > mast a few inches below the top of the mast. I think these fittings
                  > > are there for the installation of a "Solent" stay. The advice I've
                  > > found for the storm jib and storm trysail is they be close to the mast
                  > > to concentrate the center of effort. Mounting the stay a bit further
                  > > aft and a bit lower down the mast accomplishes that, but it puts the
                  > > lower mounting point at a less-massive section of the deck and will
                  > > require running backs. Everything's a compromise.
                  > >
                  > > I've toyed with the idea of moving the forestay, along with furler and
                  > > headsail back to the Solent mounting points, and installing a Code
                  > > Zero ahead. Haven't run that by my rigging advisor. Will he laugh at me?
                  > >
                  > > Russ
                  > >
                  > > --- In campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com
                  > > <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop"
                  > > <colinj@> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > Hi Russ,
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > We have just put an inner forestay fitting on our boat. It is well
                  > > forward,
                  > > > between the windlass and about 8 inches back from the existing stay. I
                  > > > don't know what your plans are but we found that mounting it that far
                  > > > forward killed two birds with one stone. It is attached high enough
                  > > on the
                  > > > mast to avoid the need for running backstays and also is in a very
                  > > heavily
                  > > > constructed part of the deck. In the opinion of the yard we used and
                  > > of the
                  > > > surveyor who looked at it there is no need to tie in to a point in
                  > > the hull.
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > This said, the fitting is very heavy duty and has a s/s backing plate
                  > > > underneath which is definitely of the 'no nonsense/bomb proof'
                  > > variety. We
                  > > > are yet to try it in anger but I am pretty confident.
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Do you think you might have any problems with anchor chain fouling your
                  > > > under-deck rigging?
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Rgds
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Colin
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > _____
                  > > >
                  > > > From: campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com
                  > > <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
                  > > > [mailto:campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com
                  > > <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
                  > > > Sent: 29 April 2009 23:51
                  > > > To: campernicholson@ yahoogroups. com
                  > > <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
                  > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Re: Question re: fitting
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Colin,
                  > > >
                  > > > I was considering whether it can serve as a lower attachment point for a
                  > > > length of wire that would serve as a brace to an attachment point on
                  > > deck
                  > > > for an inner forestay. I'm thinking of something like back-to-back
                  > > pad eyes,
                  > > > one above and one below, on the deck. The upper pad eye would be the
                  > > lower
                  > > > attachment for the inner forestay. Beneath that, a length of 1x19 would
                  > > > attach to the lower pad eye and run on down to that big fitting.
                  > > Highfield
                  > > > levers could make both above- and below-decks wires removable. As
                  > > long as
                  > > > the two wires were effectively "in line," much of the rigging forces
                  > > should
                  > > > be transmitted to that fitting, only minor force affecting the deck.
                  > > >
                  > > > I have submitted this idea to Joe Cooper at Hood Sails, and expect a
                  > > reply
                  > > > soon. If I'm off my rocker, said reply will be withering, since Joe
                  > > is an
                  > > > Aussie.
                  > > >
                  > > > In the list of drawings in the "files" portion of this forum, there's
                  > > > mention of a CN drawing showing the layout of an inner forestay. Has
                  > > anyone
                  > > > ever seen said drawing?
                  > > >
                  > > > Russ
                  > > >
                  > > > --- In campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
                  > > > yahoogroups. com, "Colin Campbell-Dunlop" <colinj@> wrote:
                  > > > >
                  > > > > It sounds to me like it might be a fitting to attach the 'bitter
                  > > end' of
                  > > > > your anchor rode.
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > On our boat, hull 225, the fitting is much higher up so that you can
                  > > > unhook
                  > > > > it even when the anchor chain is in place so the design may have
                  > > changed
                  > > > > over the years.
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > It is possible that I have a design drawing for one of the early
                  > > boats so
                  > > > > will have a look.
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > What were you thinking of attaching to it?
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Rgds
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > Colin
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > _____
                  > > > >
                  > > > > From: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
                  > > > yahoogroups. com
                  > > > > [mailto:campernicho lson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
                  > > > yahoogroups. com] On Behalf Of minnehaha64
                  > > > > Sent: 28 April 2009 22:45
                  > > > > To: campernicholson@ <mailto:campernicho lson%40yahoogrou ps.com>
                  > > > yahoogroups. com
                  > > > > Subject: [campernicholson] Question re: fitting
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > >
                  > > > > My boat is hull #99. All the way forward, inside the hull,
                  > > approximately
                  > > > at
                  > > > > the waterline, in the "v" made by the two sides meeting, embedded
                  > > in the
                  > > > > fiberglass is some sort of U-bolt or D-ring. Does anyone else have
                  > > this,
                  > > > and
                  > > > > if so, what is it? What is its intended use? Most importantly, is
                  > > it real
                  > > > > strong?
                  > > > >
                  > > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
                  > >
                  > > Spam <http://mailshield. cosmoweb. net/b.php? c=s&i=174573333& m=2f42a58a7ea0>
                  > > Not spam
                  > > <http://mailshield. cosmoweb. net/b.php? c=n&i=174573333& m=2f42a58a7ea0>
                  > > Forget previous vote
                  > > <http://mailshield. cosmoweb. net/b.php? c=f&i=174573333& m=2f42a58a7ea0>
                  >

                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.