Allegro 27, Lian

<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
  • 13 Feb 2017 09:12
    Reply # 4606361 on 4446721
    And here is a new version
    Sail area 37,3 sq. Length of the lower battens 4,5m.

    Any opinions?


  • 24 Jan 2017 18:05
    Reply # 4566289 on 4446721

    Thank you for all the arguments! It's a good challenge for me to understand how one or another difference may influence the actual experience at sea, but it sure makes me study more. Have been watching different videos/photos and reading some chapters again and again to follow you here:)

    I hope the conversation will continue! It's the same boat, possibly going offshore. Currently there are two strong sailplans with different yard angle, boom length, mast height and with different mast position. 
    Any other opinions, please?

  • 23 Jan 2017 23:59
    Reply # 4564865 on 4446721
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Well, I must disagree with you there, Robin. I don’t think a 70° yard angle needs to produce extra problems . On the last two boats, I have been a bit more generous with the mast length, than I was when rigging Johanna in 2002. This has given me freedom to move the slingpoint on the yard to a position which requires minimum trim forces on the Throat Hauling Parrel (THP) and the Yard Hauling Parrel (YHP).

    Frankly, when looking at the photos in article 1 and 2 about Frøken Sørensen, I think that sail looks quite good, good enough to me at least. The shape of Frøken Sørensen’s sail happens to be the same (AR=1.95) as the sailplan I have drawn for Hard’s Allegro 27, Lian.

    Arne


    Last modified: 24 Jan 2017 00:04 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 23 Jan 2017 16:36
    Reply # 4564136 on 4446721

    Having sailed abt 10000 M the last 4 years I have a few remarks on shaping of junk sails.

    I had a sail with a yard angle abt 60 deg and when I altered my sail increased it to abt 70 deg and I have mainly negative experience of this . Increasing the angle means that the distance between the gravity center of the sail and the "hanging" point grows and more power to right the sail up is required. this means crises, and whats even worse very much more chafing on sail and lines. My opinion is that one should try to move the weightpoint of the sail nearer to the hanging point, ie the halyard fixpoint. The Jester type sail is of course the extreme of this type.

    Robin



  • 23 Jan 2017 11:38
    Reply # 4563248 on 4446721

    Here's a factor that may influence your decision, Hard. One thing I've noticed with Weaverbird's sail is that it seems to be showing less tendency towards a fan-up than a lower, fanned planform does, though admittedly, I haven't done enough sea miles to be absolutely sure. I'm wondering whether it's the higher AR, or the lower yard angle, that's the reason for this, but I suspect that it's a bit of both, and I'm glad of it. I know Arne has a fix for a sail that is inclined to fan-ups, but it's another running line that, at the moment, I don't seem to have a need for.

  • 23 Jan 2017 09:32
    Reply # 4563096 on 4446721
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Hard,

    I have found that the three-panel top section with full-length 70° yard, and with a bit camber in even the top panels, works very well. On my last boat before Ingeborg; the 6.5m Frøken Sørensen, I had to reef a lot, and she sailed like a witch with only that top section set. Frøken Sørensen’s sail has the same shape as the last one I drew up for your Allegro, Lian, with AR=1.95.

    Arne


    Last modified: 23 Jan 2017 09:43 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 22 Jan 2017 23:40
    Reply # 4562575 on 4446721

    If the sail is cambered, both version will work well when all or most of the sail is hoisted.  I do not have any experience of a version A sail, but I like the shape the version B sail gives when deeply reefed, with its high-angled yard and three fanned panels, as seen in the photo of Arion below.  Click on the image to see it full sized.  I think this sail will be perfectly suited to offshore sailing.  PS:  My sail is flat-cut, except for 20mm of rounding along the battens in these top three fanned panels.  The boat sails to windward quite nicely, possibly because the shorter yard allows the upper, unsheeted batten to fall out, which, combined with the slight camber, creates a sweet curve in the top panels that are always working, whether under full sail or reefed.

    Last modified: 22 Jan 2017 23:45 | Anonymous member
  • 22 Jan 2017 20:55
    Reply # 4562402 on 4562173
    Scott Dufour wrote:

    My first thought,  only because it's the solution I used,  is that if you went with a split junk,  your mast would fall aft of the hatch and you'd be able to keep it.   

    I would prefer to keep it all as simple as possible. I guess split junk doesn't make it simpler at all.
    I'm pretty happy with what I have now, some certainty is maybe needed to keep going one or the other way. Maybe someone will also notice something we should pay extra   attention to. Or if something will need double-checking. 
  • 22 Jan 2017 17:23
    Reply # 4562173 on 4446721

    My first thought,  only because it's the solution I used,  is that if you went with a split junk,  your mast would fall aft of the hatch and you'd be able to keep it.   

  • 22 Jan 2017 13:49
    Reply # 4561810 on 4446721
    Some progress done with great help by Robin Fröberg and Arne Kverneland. Several conversations have been held with some sailplans drawn... As my personal experience and knowledge with JR are very limited I feel it's an artwork that should be shared. Especially as there may be others having similar dilemmas.

    There are versions A and B currently on the table. Both having their pros and cons. I'd be happy to hear your opinions before I will finally start purchasing materials and cutting any holes.
    Please keep in mind I have off-shore intentions in mind, practicing in the Baltic Sea for the time being. Out of what I've read and heard I assume version A should be more appropriate for high seas? Other than that I don't like that extra work that needs to be done fitting the mast to the current fore-hatch area. It'd be much easier if it were through the deck some 30cm fore.  

    Any comments or suggestions?

    link to version A

    link to version B

    Last modified: 13 Feb 2017 08:50 | Anonymous member
<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software