Inside or outside Track?

[Seth]

The Powers that Be

Pretty good question, Chris.

PHRF will assume any boat racing has efficient sheeting for its' sails.
If you sail a very unusual boat with terrible sheeting angles (of course this begs the question: why would you?), then this point should be made on the rating application and I think would be taken into consideration-remember though, that PHRF is arbitrary-so new boats have very subjective, rather than objective (ala IOR/MORC/IMS/IRC) ratings-but I would think for a new, untried boat, and provided the information is listed on the application you would get some credit.

Pretty moot point, though. Most boats that are in any way suitable for racing have tracks that are, or are VERY close to, the "typical" sheeting angles (11.5-13 degrees for #1 genoas, 9-11 degrees for #3's). Some of the production boats have added short track farther inboard than the "standard" for the #3's & #4's to get better height, but even these boats typically have adequate angles for the #1 genoas.

Keep in mind what was said before: just because you put track farther inboard does not guarantee huge gains going upwind-some older boats are "height" limited by hull and keel shape, and getting the sails closer to centerline will just slow it down.

howyadoinnow?

S

 

[e38 owner]

My inboard track was always too short for my 155. As such I have always used the inside track with the 130 and the outboard track with the 155
Last year I extended the track and moved the 155 inboard. There is only about a five inch difference because of the e 38's hull shape. The Car is in the middle of the gate

I have found that in light air it is very difficult to keep the telltails in the grove with the inside track and that the back of the headsail is somewhat useless due to the small slot. Lately I have gone back to the outside track in light air and the boat feels much better. In both cases I can sheet the headsail upto the spreader if needed.

In cases in which the main is super flat the slot may be big enough

 

[Seth]

Tracks and sails

You are correct that unless the clew is designed on the low side, the track is very marginal for a true 155% Genoa on the 38's (and I imagine this is true for all of the boats in this series-32-200, 34 (NOT the schumacher boat), 35-3, and of course the 38's.

It is virtually splitting hairs, but a 152-153 is about the biggest that will fit with a "normal" clew height on these tracks. If a true 155% will fit at all, it would need a very low clew, and this has its' own set of problems when you ease the sheets to reach off.

This short track problem is common on some production boats and the history of it is this: These boats were designed during the years that the IOR rule was in effect. The IOR rule allowed a maximum LP of 150% without penalty, and thus all boats racing under this rule had their largest headsails at 150%. In fact, many PHRF regions also used 150% as the baseline size back then-so, most yacht designers during those years had this in mind when determining track length. It was just uncommon to think in terms of anything bigger than 150%. In more recent years, as more and more PHRF regions went to 155% as the assumed maximum, and IOR faded from the scene, many boatbuilders, Ericson included, determined that since the vast majority of the boats sold were for cruising, it was not worth the expense of new drawings, and production change orders to accomodate a larger/longer track.

So, this is the why of it-the situation you describe sounds like the clew is too high (or the track is not long enough-same thing really) to sheet on the inboard track and get the telltales working correctly.

I am worried about your comments about the back end of the sail being "useless"-UNLESS, you mean to say that when you are on the inboard track, the lead is soo far forward(for that sail) that the leech is closed off (too tight) when sheeted in..if that is the case, the track IS too short for the clew height and/or LP. I would bet that if you had it cut to a 152-153 (mention to your sailmaker that you want to maintain a good clew height) it would sheet very well on that track. The net result will be a performance gain because you will now be able to go upwind properly with a negligible loss of sail area.

What is NOT true is to say that on the inboard track the slot is too small or that the sails don't work right-they are and they do-provided the sail truly fits the track you have...

If this is still a concern you can contact me directly and we can try and sort out exactly what is happening in your case and how to best correct your problem..

Fair winds,
S

 

[ted_reshetiloff]

Much better now

I raced a Thistle sat and sun, and since we won the day sunday we got in in time for me to get out on the Ericson with the wife and 2 year while the breeze was still up (South at 15-18). I used the inboard tracks genoa furled to about 130% with a full main, traveler dropped about 2/3rds and sheeted tight. My main is really really full as it is a little old but thats another thread... Boat pointed a lot higher than it had on the outside tracks. At least 10 degrees. My wind instrument is in need of some work so I am basing this on the widex and how I can now sail with the arrow inside of the vanes. Boatspeed was good at 7.2-7.4. I liked the way the boat sailed before but I LOVE it now! I was able to chew up some decent boats upwind with out much effort. (drinking a beer with my 2 year old on my knee) Smoked a Beneteau 36.7 which is funny because he would owe me quite a bit of time in PHRF if I remember correct. Base rating for the E 38-200 with deep keel is a 114 I think. I believe I get 12 seconds for a fixed prop and another 6 for a roller furler. Not that I am going to race this boat. I really enjoy dinghy racing over keel boats anyway. I agree 100% with Seths comments on sheeting angles and yacht design. Sometimes it is just not worth trying to put a $50 saddle on a $5 horse as my father used to say. I think you are better off trying to maximize the performance characterisitcs that your hull and foils were designed to than to spend a bunch of money and time trying to make an IOR shaped boat perform like a sportboat. (flat bottom, deep fin with narrow chord length keel with bulb, mumm 30 shape...) ANyway thanks a lot guys.

 

[Chris Miller]

Still more...

Hey Seth- Went out for Spinnaker practice on our 38-200 this weekend and were wishing we had a set of extra cars for that outside toe rail. So we went and bought some today. Wondering if you might offer an suggestions for correct placement and usage to keep the sheet/guy from being at too steep of an angle and getting into the lifelines (and continually trying to closeline yours truly while trimming).
Thanks.

Also- Ted,
A race rigged 36.7 with overlapping headsail and a deep keel on the bay rates a PHRF 78. Our 38 rates a 123 with the overlapping headsail, roller furler, folding prop, and wing keel. Nice sailing- 36.7's are fast boats when sailed well.

Chris

 

[Seth]

Spinn blocks

Good going! On a boat of this size, you should go with separate SHEETS and GUYS (aka AFTERGUYS).

The SHEET blocks are led as far aft as possible as long as you get a decent lead from the block to the winch in the cockpit being used. They are always run OUTSIDE of all lifelines and rigging, so should never interfere on any angle.

The GUYS blocks should at or near beam Max-and come directly from the POLE (outside of everything) to these blocks, then INSIDE to a winch. When CLOSE REACHING with the POLE forward near the headstay the GUYS can often lay against the lifelines and/or stanchions-bending stanchions if you are not careful. BY experimenting just ahead and just behind the Beam Max. point, you will probably be able to get pretty close to a position where this load is minimized to the point of being acceptable, BUT, if you plan on doing any serious "Pole on the headstay reaching" with a spinnaker, you really have to deal with this.

One way (the "race boat way" these days) is to mount a pair of PADEYES INSIDE[/B] the lifelines-about 1/2 way from the toe rail to the inboard track. Mount the GUY blocks on them, and run the guys from the POLE direct to the blocks, then back to the winch..The GUYS are now INSIDE the lifelines and will not interfere with anything.
The other way (and in fact easier in many ways but not without some hassle) is to purchase a REACHING STRUT (Forespar). The strut comes with 2 small padeyes which mount on each side of the mast at about boom height. As the pole nears the headstay on a beam-close reach, the guys will begin to lay against the lifelines/stanchions. This is when you rig the strut, which has a fairlead at the outboard end, and the strut pushes the guy out and away from the boat (and the lifelines as a result). Another advantage of this is that the direction of "pull" on the Spinn pole is now AWAY from the headstay (much like it is when the pole is squared back and running at deeper angles), giving you better leverage while adjusting the pole.

Again, when the pole is aft and you are deeper than a beam reach, none of this is an issue. It is only when you ease the pole forward towards the headstay on a beam or closer reach that the problem with the GUYS comes up. There should never be a problem with the sheets.

Please let me know if this made sense and if I was understanding the question properly. If I missed it, or you would like to reach me directly if it is not clear, please feel free to do so.

Keep up the good work!

S

 

[Chris Miller]

Thought that sail looked odd...

Note to self: Read the label.
So our cruising chute is a UK sail, which is a redheaded stepchild in our sail inventory- everything else is North stuff (including our dodger and all our covers). On the bag where it would normally show the size, it says "Flasher". I don't know a lot about symetrical spinnakers (or cruising chutes, for that matter), so I just sort of shrugged it off with a frown. Bunches of you guys are laughing at this point.
We got some friends of ours who are symetrically inclined racers to help us with getting it up and going on our boat. When our friend was rigging it, it had a "tack" and a "clew"--- I know the asym that I fly on the Farr has a tack and a clew... hmmmmmm. It went up and looked odd and was really hard to fly- no shoulder to it at all. (in retrospect I think the clew was probably on the pole )
So I discover today with a little research that a "flasher" is UK's cruising asym for dummies. While I feel sort of dumb, I feel better that it didn't look right. And much better now that I know we can use it correctly and I know how to fly it.
So let's scrap my last post and replace it with- does anybody have any tips about rigging this bad boy? Especially where and how I might rig an adjustable tack?
Thanks,
Chris

 

[Geoff Nelson]

deck jewelry position for a symmetrical on a E38

I have been doing a lot of spinnaker work of late on my E-381 and we have the guy leads even with the stanchion nearest max beam like Seth says and then under the lifelines. When reaching, it does lay against the top lifeline forward but if it gets too tight you can loosen/slack the lifelines a smidge and they take the load fine. I have never had the pole against the headstay as the sail is too square. The stock pole for the boat is such a beast I don't know if I would add another pole to the mix... I think my foredeck crew would quit! They are threatening to make me buy a carbon one!!!!

I picked up an shiny new asso from an Hunter 380 for cheap last week and have been playing with that as well and for reaching it is much easier with the only downside is the lazy sheet is too short as I am running hotter angles and the clew is farther back that I would take my symmetrical (which is off an Express 37 and has very big shoulders). The asso sail is a little shorter in the luff but that helps keep it manageble for shorthanding.

 

[Seth]

Flashers, etc.

Always a good idea to read the label! Since I once owned a UK loft, here is the story with the Flasher: The Flasher is simply UK's Assymetrical cruising spinnaker. UK wanted to be very price competitive in this big market and reasoned that since these were cruising sails, the size was not super critical. Most sailmakers continue to make these sails about 80-90% of "full size", and full size which means the girths may not exceed 1.8 X J (or JC if the pole is longer than the J). Since most cruising kites were about 80-90% of full size, and were priced accordingly, UK used the easiest way of reducing cost-they made it smaller. By another 10% or so.

So, Flashers, unless they were ordered specially, are typically smaller than the average cruising spinnaker. A result of this is they often reach a bit better and run a bit worse than the other sailmakers' offerings.

Now, here is something many people are confused about (and I feel strongly about from an aerodynamic viewpoint-especially since I am also a pilot):

A-Sails are often thought of as more of a reaching sail than a running sail: WRONG!

The reason you usually see boats with A-sails sailing hotter angles has nothing to do with the nature of the sail itself, but has to do with the fact that they don't have articulating poles, but sprits, and cannot "'square back" at deeper angles. And, since the pole cannot be squared back, the sail shapes are often optimized more for reaching, but this is NOT a function of symmetry or A-symmetry.

In fact, on the round the world boats, and many others, long poles are used which CAN be squared back, and these boats use exclusively A-sails, but run as deep or deeper than anything else-conditions permitting. On these boats, they have a selection of A-sails-some for reaching, some for running.

If you go back to the theory that sails should and do approximate an airfoil, they should have a leading edge and a trailing edge to work well. Mainsails do, headsails do, and so should spinnakers. There is no aerodynamic argument to support why a symmetrical sail should EVER be better than an A-sail, as long as we are talking apples to apples: A-sail running kite for Sym. running kites, A-reachers for Sym. reachers, etc. Provided they are the same size and built for the same use, the A-sail by definition will be faster than a "round sail" with "2 trailing edges".

Let's go further. What are we doing with conventional kites when we adjust the pole? Partly, other than adjusting for wind angle, when we raise and lower the pole we are trying to force some assymmetry between the luff and leech! We are changing the shape of the luff relative to the leech to make a "leading edge" and a "trailing edge", right?

We have mentioned the Ben 36.7 recently. This is a "conventional pole" boat designed for conventional kites. I sailed the last 2 Mac Races on 2 different 36.7's (the first year there was no One Design Class, so as long as the sails were PHRF legal we were fine, and the second year the Class, which does not allow A-sails in OD racing, elected to allow any sails as long as they were PHRF legal-just for this race), and although these were both very much downwind races, I used A-sails exclusively, and was the top 36.7 both times. Last year I was aboard Karma, and the year before it was Raptor-in case anyone would want to see how well we did in class and overall. There was zero doubt that we could sail deeper and faster with the pole squared way back than any of the regular kites. Same thing this Spring on the Cabo Race on board a Columbia 52-an old warhorse from the 70's. We went with an AP A-sail the whole way, and the guys who had sailed the boat for decades with normal kites were blown away!

What does this mean to you? These cruising spinnakers are all undersized and mostly shaped for reaching, so won't be exceptional when running with the pole back, BUT you can rig them that way, and manage to sail reasonably deep as long as you use the pole. If you had a full-sized, AP shaped A-sail, you would have the best of both worlds-because you can still fly them without a pole when cruising or shorthanded racing, and when you get the point where you need to sail deeper, just rig the pole and square back!!!

For rigging the cruising kites, I run a long tack line through a snatch block at the bow-and back to the pit. This way I can lower the tack when reaching close, or let it raise up when sailing deeper right from the 'pit. Rig 2 sheets on the clew-one to each side, and off you go...

We can go into this further if anyone wants more info.

Soap Box off now,
S

 

[ted_reshetiloff]

I use the Tacker by ATN. Doubt this link will work but maybe...

http://baconsails.com/ships_store/product_info.php?cPath=428&products_id=24305

It follows the same principle Seth employs with the line going back to the pit but the strop keeps the tack from falling off to leeward when you ease it off. I have only used it once but seemed to work well and allowed me to sail pretty deep given the conditions.

 

[Matey]

more inboard track .. ?

Thanks again Seth ..

Once again, very helpful information. I’ve been experimenting with my jib lead inside the uppers/intermediates and sheeted on the rail on my 32-2 and have measured pointing improvement w/o loss of speed if the boat is powered up as noted. This is admittedly with my current high cut / blown out jib. Am I compensating for the sail shape with the lead a bit ?
I’m having a cross-cut jib built out of high end dacron (cost, use & durability) and have had been talking with the sail maker and my Son’s boss ( a prominent rigger) about inboard tracks. They’re both old guys familiar with E boats and agree we should play with adding them. The sail will be a 100 and some odd % .. enough to fill the J and just to the spreaders as mentioned. Any further thoughts with the advance of sail cloths, I notice this is an old thread. I'll take a few degrees of pointing for the distance stuff I sail. Likely I’ll need to add an outboard track or padeye as well. The foot will be cabin height. I notice no access under the current outboard track. Can I over drill, pour, drill and tap

Regards, Greg

That title is stolen from a hilarious thread in Sailing Anarchy-but to answer Jim,

The 70's generation of Ericson 32's, 35's etc. relied primarily on the toe rail tracks for their Genoas, and the factory did not normally install an inside track. While it true that with an inboard lead/track, and only in very flat water, the boat can be made to point a couple of degree higher than if only the toerail track was used, this was usually at the expense of some VMG, and most owners just used the outboard track for upwind sailing. This was largely due to the shape of the boat (advanced for its' day) and keel, and 33-35 degrees apparent was about as high as they can go efficiently. In fact, the 35-2 was often seen going upwind with a high clewed Genoa and a genoa staysail set inside (double head rig), and doing so VERY WELL-lower to be sure, but very fast. Not so great around the b uoys with lots of tacks, but on a distance race-magic! On more modern boats, this configuration is limited to close reaching (or beam reaching in bigger breeze when a kite won't fly).

Switch to the newer 38's, 32, 34, 35, 30+, etc, with the deeper fin keels and wider beam and you have boats that easily sail in the 27-29 degree apparent range and benefit greatly from the ability to sheet farther inboard. These boats have full length inboard and outboard tracks as standard as a result.

What I have done when sailing the old 32's and 35's is to use the toe rail track, but use a short sheet with a hook on the end and drag the clew inboard (I would use a windward or cabin top winch) just a bit when upwind in very flat water-to gain just a bit of height. But again because of the hull and keel, do not expect these boats to sail as high as the newer models. They may have similar VMG's, and even get to the top mark at the same time, but will do so at a wider sailing angle.

Cheers again!

S

 

[Matey]

huumm

"Genoa track out on the toe rail? The primary reason for this is likely for outboard leads when reaching, right? If so, there may be a better solution: Put a couple of padeyes out as far as you can on the deck (and still be able to through bolt them). Put them about 8-10" forward of where your headsails normally sheet. You can run a "short sheet" through a block on the padeye to the clew, and take the other end to a free winch (cabin top?) and you can now move the clew progressively farther outboard as your sail deeper angles (using both sheets until you are fully on the outboard lead). This gives plenty of adjustment, and when you consider it would be a lot of track for just a few locations, it makes sense from a cost, weight, and installation point of view"

may have found a different option for outboard lead forward ? hate to move my pole. gonna be a busy area with inboard track too such is rigging i suppose

Regards, Greg

 

[Seth]

Hmm?

Hi Greg,

Sorry for the delay..Do you still need someanswers? Contact me directly if so. In general, the inboard track for non-overlapping jib will really help upwind, and you are right that a short track or padeye near the rail will be a big help when reaching to get a good outboard lead..

Cheers

 

[Matey]

Closing the loop on my inboard tracks

Not that there seems to be any current interest .. I thought I'd document the process we used to add inboard tracks for the sail I had built.The sail is a non-overlapping jib, has positive roach, just comes short of the spreaders and is about cabin height on the foot. It measures out at 102 % of the J. I played with jib lead angles between 11-14 degrees determined by the doc attached. I settled on about 12 degrees. To determine the sheeting angle I strung a line to bisect the luff about 60-65 % up the luff and made that the middle of the track. For track I used an 8' stick of 1-1/4" Schaefer T track and ended up cutting each to about 3-1/2' to take advantage of the length I wanted with some fudge factor and attachment screw locations into and through the deck. I think each side has 12 screws, with 10 through bolted and 2 machine screwed into west systems epoxy with hi-density filler. Mounting was allot of work due to the liner, but I'm happy with the outcome.
I've only sailed once so far in about 10 knots and all seems fine. I'll know more after our next race in January

Regards, Greg