PAR Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Every rig is owner unique. As you sail the boat, typically with the stock rigging arrangement, you'll find there are things you wish where different, so you make changes and adjustments, to suit your preferences. This is absolutely normal. A common change is the main and mizzen sheet lands. The plans have the main coming down to turning blocks on the thwart and out to jam cleats on the combing. This is fine, but many prefer to have the sheets land on the thwart, through a swiveling block/cam cleat arrangement. The mizzen has a similar arrangement, but I quickly changed this to have the sheet come down the mizzen boom and land again on a swivel block/cam cleat setup. For me this placed both sheets in the forehand position, which I preferred. Other common changes are to bring halyards and lifts aft to the cockpit, though I prefer them on the stick. It's something you just have to try, if only to find out what setup you like best. Everyone's version is slightly different for this reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Silsbe Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 Thanks PAR! I was thinking along the same lines for the mizzen. I'm even thinking about a small headknocker cleat on the miizzen sprit. What concerns me more is the centerboard system. For one thing, I'd like the area forward of the mizzen mast to be as flush as possible. (For my lounging first mate.). This would mean reducing the height of the c/b "horn" to just flush. I might incorporate an internal sheave into the horn. Everything wants to be low profile for my bride of 44 years. Just thinking… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Silsbe Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 A Ronstan "headbanger". http://www.apsltd.com/c-325-cam-cleat-swivel-bases-cam-arms-other-mountings.aspx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hirilonde Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 . This would mean reducing the height of the c/b "horn" to just flush. I might incorporate an internal sheave into the horn. As you shorten the horn you reduce the leverage for raising and lowering the board. I don't think I would do this, at least not until I had tried it as per plans. It is easy to cut more off later, adding it back on is not so simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chick Ludwig Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 I'll come for a visit in a week or so. i have a thought or two on this. I'm sure that we can work something out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Vacanti Posted January 4, 2015 Report Share Posted January 4, 2015 You could get rid of the horn completely by using a weighted centerboard. There would only be an uphaul line, the board is lowered simply by easing the uphaul. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAR Posted January 5, 2015 Report Share Posted January 5, 2015 I have previous posts about exactly this, a closed top centerboard case and much decreased hoisting tackle arrangement. The client wanted an unobstructed forward cockpit so he could lay out and nap on raised sole slats. It does require some alteration to the case sides, king post location and centerboard size, forward of the pivot. The hoisting tackle is inclosed within the case initially, exits through a hole in the forward king post, rounds a block attached to the forward bulkhead, then terminates on the bale of a single block. Attached to this single block is a whip tackle, both living on the side of the case and terminating under the thwart in a cam cleat. This provides two to one advantage on the board, which had about 20 pounds of lead cast into it. The result is a very simple hoist, a continuous case cap, without an arm sticking up or spitting water and a clean unobstructed forward cockpit once the sole slats are lifted into position. As you can see there's a lot more case in front of the pivot, than the plans show. The actual and the as drawn differences are, I straightened up the forward king post (see first photo) so it would land under the seat stringer. I also terminated the whip tackle under the thwart, not on the forward end of the case as drawn. My case cap was simply more of the 3/8" plywood (client request) used for the seat tops, but it would look pretty is it was a hunk of mahogany or something. I also didn't need a sheave "let" into the forward king post (as drawn). I just drilled a hole and inserted a hunk of HPDE, then drill this for the hoist lanyard exit. In reality, there's no downward lead on the lanyard at case exit, which is why I didn't need the sheave in the post. You'll also note the forward potion of the board is radiused, sympathetically with the pivot. There's a groove for the hoisting lanyard to ride in, and it's about twice as deep as the 1/4" line, so it doesn't jump out. There's not enough room between the board and the case walls for it to get jammed, but the deep groove was just some cheap insurance. With the sole slats raised, a large flat area for napping. You can also see the main sheet swivel blocks and cam cleats (also home made) being arranged. A third similar setup was used for the mizzen sheet which wasn't double ended like the main. This mizzen sheet block was mounted closer to the mast and farther aft in comparison to the mains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Silsbe Posted January 9, 2015 Author Report Share Posted January 9, 2015 @ PAR: that's beautiful work on the boat! What is the wood you used for the thwarts. Looks like walnut. I was hoping to simply shorten the horn, and lower the amount of intrusion. I like the idea of the sealed c/b slot, but maybe I'll stick closer to the original. In rethinking the headknocker idea. Not sure if it'd work, very well when the sprit is on the leeward side of the sail. Maybe the mizzen cleat gets attached to the base of the mast. Not sure. Can't wait to play around with it. @ PAR: that's beautiful work on the boat! What is the wood you used for the thwarts. Looks like walnut. I was hoping to simply shorten the horn, and lower the amount of intrusion. I like the idea of the sealed c/b slot, but maybe I'll stick closer to the original. In rethinking the headknocker idea. Not sure if it'd work, very well when the sprit is on the leeward side of the sail. Maybe the mizzen cleat gets attached to the base of the mast. Not sure. Can't wait to play around with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAR Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 The deck was a teak veneer, the margins, combing and covering boards mahogany. The thwart is 40 year old mahogany plywood (through and through), with a white oak (solid) trim fore and aft. The slats are cedar with aluminum angle stock on the edges to hold it in place on the seat boxes. Obviously, a lot of variations from the plans, but this wasn't my first rodeo. Yes, you do lose some leverage over the board in hoist, with the arm shortened or removed, but it's a buoyant board so not a lot of load there. This is why the plans show both and down haul and up haul tackle. If the board is weighted enough to insure it sinks with authority, you've eliminated the need for the down haul tackle, so all you have left is to drag it back into the case. I used a 2:1 tackle on the hoist tackle (didn't really need to BTW), with is still much simpler than the stock setup and offers more then enough power to hoist the weighted board. I've done this centerboard arrangement on many boats and it's a standard setup on my designs as well. It doesn't cause issues, doesn't foul, is simple with few pieces, etc. You still have a 133% of leverage over the pivot, so coupled with the tackle it easily handles the 25 pound board, with a 12.5 lanyard load, as you haul on the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken_Potts Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 I have had to dive under a boat to free a gravity-deployed centerboard before and now I much prefer to have a downhaul (especially in winter). One good thing about having the centerboard intrude into the cockpit is that there is a visual cue about the centerboard position. If the stick is all the way forward the board is up. If it's all the way back the board is down. If I want to bring the board back a bit so I can sail under just the mizzen for a little while I can use the stick to judge the right middle position. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dnjost Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 The other advantage is removing obstructions from the case. You can see where it is and push it out with a stick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chick Ludwig Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 The "old ones" used to leave a small hole in the top of the case to insert a rod to push a stuck board down with. You can mark your c/b pennant to indicate how far down the board is, as well as "feeling" the balance of the boat. Actually, I've only had a jammed board once, and that was because the lifting arrangement had a block and tackle (pulleys) inside the trunk that jammed when the board hit something and pushed up into the trunk. The offset centerboard protected by a keel on the center line tends to keep stuff out. I've also had the lifting pennant break loose from the board and leave it hanging down. But this was bad engineering on my part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAR Posted January 10, 2015 Report Share Posted January 10, 2015 The offset board on the CS series doesn't get jammed up. The keel batten takes the brunt of the abuse, before the slot gets anything. The location of the tackle (my version) will offer an indication of where the board is, in fact I marked mine with a Sharpie, so it could be pulled to a specific height each time. I've done this type of enclosed arrangement many times and blatantly stole the idea from a long dead famous designer. I even have a hydraulic version on the same principle. If the board and case are stiff enough, you can dramatically improve the righting arm of the boat with a seriously weighted board, say 50 or more pounds. This can mean hiking out a lot or not having to hike out much, plus a likely significant improvement to the AVS. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.