The gunter rig could work, but I'm hesitant to use a second spar that
carries a load. The Wharram spar doesn't do a whole lot other than
support the sail and keep its shape, so that doesn't disturb me as
much. A gunter, or anything with a sleeve, creates a joint that will
have to bear a lot of dynamic loading, and I'm not the type to be a
test platform for something that could fail in a bad way. Forgetting
safety and sailing issues, I'd just be worried about tearing a sail
that size. Those things aren't cheap. With a gunter, that joint would
also have to move up and down the mast as the sail is reefed, and
that's another worry. That would have to be a pretty strong car.
Heck, i worry about that with the Wharram spar, and it's not really
I hadn't thought about the problems with the sleeves on the Wharram
during a capsize. Now that you mention it, though, I can remember Rob
talking about how hard it is to right the Elementarry once the sleeves
fill up. It makes sense -- Wharram designs his boats with a lot less
sail area in order to be safe for cruising, and since they're not
likely to right if they do go over, water in the sleeves reallyisn't an
issue. It is an issue if you're going to push a harryproa to its
limits, though. You'd need a line to winch the sails down before
righting the boat.
While it's probably not really feasible, I like your bladder idea a
lot. Could you imagine the great wing shape and massive flotation that
would provide? Of course you can, but I have to ask the rhetorical
question anyway. The biggest problem would be dealing with it in
sections in order to handle reefing.
Or, since the mast rotates, the mast itself could fill much of that
sock. You could build the masts as they are, to handle the loads, and
add big fairings to leeward, to fill out the wing and fill the sail
sock. You wouldn't need much structure at all for that wing section,
and since it's the front of the mast that takes most of the load,
there's no need to beef up the wing to handle a track.
However, you'd still need a fair amount of slack in the sock in order
to allow the sail to bunch up for reefing. Or, the bottom of the mast
can just be circular, leaving lots of space for reefing, with the wing
starting a few feet higher.
I don't think I'd be interested in a Wharram without the sock.
Adding a track just adds expense, complexity, and points of failure,
while giving up the clean leading surface. Once that happens, I'm more
likely to go with a battened una.
I do envy the ease of use of a single una or easyrig, but I'm also
hesitant to give up on the schooner for the reasons we discussed
earlier: the extra sail area it can carry in light wind, the lower
center of effort, the simplicity of having only one type of sail on
board, the superior steering if the rudders go, and so forth.
What a great design challenge this is! You're right: there's no
telling what will happen with these boats over the next few years. Rob
is really innovative, and a lot of people are helping to push and/or
pull him in new directions.
Rob dalton wrote:
Must admit I glossed over that section as something to be sorted
out when building. I figured I'd just glass on a loop of uni or kevlar.
I plan to have a few loops around the boat for attaching things like
fenders or bases of bipods for lifting things.
You could get the extra height with a gunter rig for an easy rig
on a sleeve that can travel to just below the jib stay.
The taper on a mast for a wharram configuration would probably
be a bit less so it shouldn't be an issue providing the sail is cut
accordingly and you'd have to rig up an outhaul on the gaff. Abrasion
resistance could probably be overcome with a light kevlar layer.
Rob reckons they are a hassle if they fill up with water when
they fall over. I was wondering if the sock could have a bladdere run
the lenght of the sock which can be inflated for improving both
bouyancy and shape but deflated in hurry when you want to bring it
down. Almost certainly more trouble than it's worth but I couldn't
resist the idea.
I can't see any reason not to run the sails on a track with the
gaff on a small car. As the sails can be weather cocked on any point of
sail, there isn't extra advantage in easy downhaul downwind.
Who knows what morphing will be done in the next few years. It
is pretty staggering how far it's come since the first Harry
Did you read what Jordan wrote about the bridle going through chocks
and then to a cleat or winch? I was wondering about the loading
myself, but just figured that I'd put in a large backing plate. He
actually suggests straps on the hull, connected to thimble ends of a
bridle using shackles. Not much chafe in that solution, plus it's
probably more likely to survive a huge load.
I'm also not fully set on rigs. However, despite my appreciation for
the easyrig's ease of use, I'm still predisposed against it because of
the 64' height limitation for bridges. I don't think that I can get
the light wind performance I want with a mast of that height.
I love the schooner for all the reasons we've discussed, but then
there's that extra weight and cost. I like the una rigs, but that
wharram looks darn efficient, and also inexpensive (comparatively
speaking, of course). My one big question about it is how to anchor
that gaff to a mast with a changing diameter, and do so without chafing
the carbon/epoxy, which I'm told does not have high abrasion resistance.
I'm glad that my boat is at least a few years away. Not only does
this provide more time for Rob, Mark, and the folks on the forum to
come up with improvements, it also gives me time to figure out what the
heck it is that I want to do. That's probably the toughest thing. In
many ways it's easier to get a production boat and accept its
limitations. Having complete freedom requires a lot more thought and
weighing of options.
rob dalton wrote:
This is a hassle, The line needs to be retrieved , retied
witha rolling hitch and let out again. A pair of bridles could make it
more comfortable. Tie the one not under tension then haul in the other
untie and let out the extra. You'd get pretty fast at tieing a rolling
I'd also like to see a comparison between a Wharram rig and
a una. My plan so far is to use a schooner wharram type rig with a
better shaped gaff. This is a long way off and I'm starting to see some
of the advantages of the Easy rig in terms of bow loading.
Mike Crawford <email@example.com>
i agree with you on the drogue system. Redundant, mechanisms, ease
of deployment (just pay it out), better continuous loading, lower
maximum loading, quicker response to breaking waves, less likely to
foul. They make it hard to argue for a single large para anchor. I've
never set one myself, but I've read many stories about people who have
botched their deployment during really bad weather.
The only thing I question is the ability to adjust the loading by
varying the amount of the drogue line paid out. Everything I see on
the Jordan site shows a fixed bridle going out to lines that then
attach to the drogues.
Your repeated posts over time are slowly infecting me with the
wharram rig. My ideal rig would be a reef-able dynarig, but the
dynarig folks are hard to find these days, and I'm not sure if they
ever solved the reefing problem.
While I'd hate to give up my pretty golden mylar Pentex sails, I'll
admit that this is somewhat of a shallow desire. With the strengths of
the wharram rig, it's possible that the stiffness and high modulus of
Pentex aren't important. The additional area aloft, and the shaping
from the gaff, combined with the smooth leading edge, could make up for
the soft sailcloth.
I wish it were possible to test a wharram rig versus an equivalent
una rig, and then look at the costs.
I'll post the wharram thing sometime in the next few months (after
the trailerable issue). I just want to wait until I'm quiet for a
little while, and also until I've finished reading all the past
postings. I'm slowly getting there.
rob dalton wrote:
I started to realise what I had been doing after an
excessive number of memorial services and that three of the boats I
had worked on were on the bottom. It started m ehtinking seriously
about safety at sea from an engineering perspective.
To me the series system with continuous loading along
the line should give better surge characteristics , be less susceptible
to wrapping itself round bits and pieces- as happenned to that bloke
trying to kite his way across an ocean, failure of an element is not
catastrophic, easier to launch
I think I have come to the conclusion that most modern
sailing boats should be attached at the bow if current is their main
concern and by the stern if wind is the problem. For a Harry this is
not a problem. The long, low rocker hulls means that the boats will
respond to the pressure on the bow from the rode, due to oscillating
winds, with a damped motion.
I appreciate your damping of the almost acrimonious
debate. I am after reasoned engineering for criticism so I can learn
and tend to get impatient with liturgy.
have been one of those fishermen who have fished in the Tasman sea for
Well then, my hat is off to you. :-)
I also really like the theory of paying out more or less of the
drogue line depending upon how much you want to slow your progress.
I like about the combination of a Harry and a jordan series
drogue is that if you want to slow the boat to almost a stop, ie a
para anchor, then you merely pay out more elements to you get to the
same total area of the equivalent para chute anchor.
There has been derision about anchoring from the stern without a
solid explanation why. On some boats it is quite successful and much
more comfortable in that it reduces yawing.
(I have been one of those fishermen who have fished in the Tasman sea
for a living)
Photos – NEW, now offering a quality
print service from just 8p a photo.
Photos – NEW, now offering a quality
print service from just 8p a photo.
Messenger NEW - crystal clear PC to PC calling
worldwide with voicemail