I thought “sweating” was another word for that.  One crew member “sweats” the 
halyard while another crew member tails it.

Cheers,
Randy

> On Dec 12, 2017, at 9:29 AM, Dennis C. via CnC-List <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> Jump.  Probably a better term.  Maybe we just use the Hispanic pronunciation. 
> :)
> 
> Dennis C.
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 10:20 AM, Joel Aronson via CnC-List 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Dennis,
> 
> Nice blocks.  We "jump" halyards up North.  And 30 years olds don't date 
> teenagers.  :)  
> 
> Joel
> 
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Dennis C. via CnC-List 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> Interesting.  Never thought one of those old 90 degree exit blocks would rip 
> out but there's proof.
> 
> Here's some more thoughts on re-configuring running rigging.
> 
> While I did mention that as part of Touche' running rigging reconfiguration 
> I'd removed the two 90 degree exit sheave blocks at the mast base, I didn't 
> mention that I installed halyard exit plates well above deck level.  All the 
> halyards exit high enough that the mast person can easily grab and "hump" the 
> halyards.  (Not sure that hump is a local term or not.  Refers to the 
> repetitive grab and hoist action for hoisting sails.)  I covered the holes 
> for the old exit blocks with metal plates.  
> 
> When re-configuring the running rigging, I wanted to ensure that the loads 
> were carried by the mast, not by the collar.  In some boats, the halyard 
> turning load is transferred to the collar or to a deck mounted turning block. 
>  In my opinion, that is not optimal.  Some boats have a short turnbuckle or 
> such which connects the collar to the mast to prevent the collar (and deck) 
> from lifting.
> 
> After some research, I  found Garhauer had some nice hinged mast base turning 
> blocks.  Guido even offered to countersink the bracket for flat head 
> fasteners.  I think Garhauer was making these blocks for Catalina.  They can 
> be seen here:  
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_sb5TfIENvsdTZpUEFRcjZ1SEE 
> <https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_sb5TfIENvsdTZpUEFRcjZ1SEE>
> 
> You can also see the top of the metal plate covering the exit block hole 
> behind the black line (which is the pole topping lift).  The red line is Spin 
> 1.  The aftmost white line is the main halyard.  The blue line on the forward 
> part of the mast is the spin pole car sheet.
> 
> Keep in mind that Touche' is rigged to race.  I had been racing as crew on 
> many boats for nearly a decade so I'd seen a lot of racing rigs and knew how 
> I wanted Touche' rigged.  Of course, converting an early 70's boat to 
> approximate today's efficient racing rigs is a compromise.
> 
> Although I was able to cross the port jib halyard to exit starboard, I 
> haven't crossed the wing (spinnaker) halyards to the opposite sides.  
> Touche's spinnaker halyards are external.  I think Touche's masthead is 
> unusual.  Seems C&C (Klacko) used several different mastheads.  Touche's is a 
> single ear projecting forward.  My buddy's Hull 61 has two ears or bails 
> projecting at about 45 degrees.  Touche's original spinnaker setup had a 
> shackle with two blocks.  It can be seen here:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_sb5TfIENvsQ1R6SkRkTThKZEE 
> <https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_sb5TfIENvsQ1R6SkRkTThKZEE>
> 
> One of the issues with that was the top of the furler extrusion extended 
> upward between the two blocks.  When the furler spun, it whacked around 
> between the blocks.  Not optimum.  I replaced the shackle with an eyebolt and 
> eye nut to spread the distance between the blocks.  I also replaced the two 
> old Schaefer blocks with Harkens.  See the new configuration here:
> 
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_sb5TfIENvsMWFpLTdLaUpoVkE 
> <https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_sb5TfIENvsMWFpLTdLaUpoVkE>
> 
> Crossing them externally is not a good option.  In order to cross them, I'd 
> have to install exit sheaves just below the masthead in order to run the 
> halyards inside the mast.  
> 
> For non-racers, the reason you want to cross halyards is to put the mast 
> person on the high (windward) side of the boat as you approach and round race 
> marks.  It is not only better for weight distribution, it is safer for the 
> crewperson.  Hoisting a sail from the low side of the boat while the boat is 
> heeled 15-20 degrees (and your butt is hanging over the lifeline) is 
> intimidating.  We most frequently do port roundings (leave mark to port).
> 
> Dennis C.
> Touche' 35-1 #83
> Mandeville, LA
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Matthew L. Wolford via CnC-List 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> James:
>  
>     If you’re looking for general feedback, I’ll add my two cents.  The main 
> halyard on my 42 was wire-to-rope and was led internally through an exit box 
> near the base of the mast.  In my case, a winch on the deck near the mast was 
> used for the main.  A few years ago we were heading out for a race in about 
> 20-25 knots of breeze, started to raise the main, and the exit box ripped out 
> of the mast.  Something about that 90 degree angle results in a lot of force. 
>  We made a semi-permanent repair that got us through the season.  At the end 
> of the season, I decided to do several things: 1) instead of using the old 
> configuration, I eliminated the exit box and started using a mast-mounted 
> winch that was already on the mast but wasn’t being used for anything (which 
> I found curious); 2) a short distance above the winch, I installed a mast 
> exit plate so the halyard would stay internal; and 3) I replaced the 
> wire-to-rope halyard with a low-stretch New England rope.  I forget the name, 
> but it was more high tech than Sta-Set.  I like the new configuration, 
> although someone needs to raise the halyard at the mast (which is no 
> different than it was before but may be a drawback for shorthanded sailors).  
> The only issue I have is that the high-tech line is not as low-stretch as 
> manufacturer claims, and I use the Cunningham more than I care to as the wind 
> picks up.  That said, the run from the winch to the top of the mast is over 
> 50 feet, so some stretch is to be expected.  When the current halyard is 
> retired, I will replace it with something that is really low stretch, and may 
> possibly go back to wire-to-rope.
>  
>     MLW
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray 
> <https://www.paypal.me/stumurray>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Joel 
> 301 541 8551 <tel:(301)%20541-8551>
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray 
> <https://www.paypal.me/stumurray>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 
> Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
> every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use 
> PayPal to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
> 

_______________________________________________

Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions.  Each and 
every one is greatly appreciated.  If you want to support the list - use PayPal 
to send contribution --   https://www.paypal.me/stumurray

Reply via email to