A Perspective on Junk Rig History

<< First  < Prev   1   2   Next >  Last >> 
  • 10 Jan 2011 20:06
    Reply # 492867 on 492795
    Anonymous member (Administrator)
    Kurt Jon Ulmer wrote: I think I'll start a topic called 'Inshore Sailing - Offshore Sailing - What differences?' and see what objective thoughts we can collect there. 

    But here, let me suggest that there's no difference in validity, whichever you think is more fun, lazy, available to you, family-friendly, economical, challenging, comfortable, blogworthy or in any way worthwhile. 

    Also, to Arne, you may well have sailed more miles in all (if that matters) than many of us lazy ocean-crossing people, and tweaked, studied, modified and handled your sails much more, certainly than me. In the blinkin' North Sea! And taken time to share what you've learned. Feel good about it.

    Kurt


    Thanks Kurt.

    My number of sailed miles would probably not have impressed any one – I have never tried to sum them up. However if number of "take-offs and landings", number of groundings (not on mud; on 4billion years old granite!) and numbers of biscuits and cups of coffee under way counts, then I’m an old salt! And then there is all the fun in the rig tweaking process – and when overtaking Ketil in Edmond Dantes with a speed difference of 0.0001kts...

    Oh, yes, I feel good about it...

    Cheers, Arne

  • 10 Jan 2011 19:17
    Reply # 492795 on 490656
    I think I'll start a topic called 'Inshore Sailing - Offshore Sailing - What differences?' and see what objective thoughts we can collect there. 

    But here, let me suggest that there's no difference in validity, whichever you think is more fun, lazy, available to you, family-friendly, economical, challenging, comfortable, blogworthy or in any way worthwhile. 

    Also, to Arne, you may well have sailed more miles in all (if that matters) than many of us lazy ocean-crossing people, and tweaked, studied, modified and handled your sails much more, certainly than me. In the blinkin' North Sea! And taken time to share what you've learned. Feel good about it.

    Kurt

  • 10 Jan 2011 18:16
    Reply # 492749 on 492517
    Anonymous member (Administrator)
    Annie Hill wrote: No, no Arne - you quite misunderstand me: I completely take on board the fact that many people are constrained by time, but I also think that just as there are people who will amble home on a fat, old, gaffer, with patched and stretched sails, so are there junkies who don't mind not going particularly well to windward. 

     

    Stavanger, Monday

    Well and fine Annie, let’s live and let live :-).

    Still, somehow I interpret messages on these pages to saying that Johanna’s rig is an inshore rig, How is that?

    The fact is rather that lazy old Arne is an inshore man and that Johanna as a whole is not equipped for offshore travelling (although several Alo 28s have crossed the Pond)

    If I were to take Johanna across the Atlantic I would have to do a number of things to her on deck first:

    A much stouter anchor system would be needed (with stronger bow rollers etc.)

    The big windows would need plywood shutters

    Lots of new electrics would be needed, generator and LED lanterns, AIS... you name it

    Probably an inboard engine.

    Windvane selfsteering of course.

    Inside there would have to be changes too:

    Lots of more secure lockers would be needed to avoid having things flying about

    Better sea-berths

    Most important of all; a much better and sea-able galley would be needed.

    The rig itself would not need many alterations:

    I would secure the mast better to ensure that it never ever would jump out of its step

    I might fit a fan-up preventer line to the yard

    A boom gallows combined with running Lazy Jacks would be a good idea.

    No, I would not reduce the size of her rig, neither in area nor in camber. The almost flat top panel is only 7sqm and that is a small enough "trysail" for that boat.

    Luckily, there are plenty of nice sailing grounds in my neighbourhoods. I don’t have to "cross the river to fetch water"...

    Cheers,

    Arne

     

     

     

     

  • 10 Jan 2011 08:45
    Reply # 492562 on 490656
    I wonder if the guy who opened this topic might now get away with summarising it a little, and suggesting that maybe it's near its natural end?

    - It seems everyone honours the history of the junk rig in their way, whether by sailing some decades-old or centuries-old traditional form that works well enough, or by basing their innovations and experiments on designs that have stood the test of time, and then transcending what was thought possible.

    - The JRA is happy to present a fuller range of designs as 'in current use.'

    - Safe to say, too, that we all sail differently and think. Differently.

    I'm laughing at myself for perhaps starting, or resurrecting, a Flat Earth, er... Sail Society. I'm really not looking to gather followers... And also for opening two topics at once that ended up spilling so much into each other! All good fun, though.

    Thanks very much,
    Kurt

    (see 'Flat Sails are Okay - mehitabel' topic for less history and more or less camber...)

  • 10 Jan 2011 08:26
    Reply # 492559 on 491766
    Annie Hill wrote: One of my wishes for the online JRA seems to be coming true: more people with miles and fewer in their armchairs are discussing the rig.  IMHO, windward ability has been to JR what capsizing is to multihulls, with far too much emphasis on this one aspect and far too little on all the advantages that also need to be taken into consideration. ...
    Hope that doesn't sound like a rant.
    It sounds like good common sense.
  • 10 Jan 2011 05:32
    Reply # 492517 on 490656
    No, no Arne - you quite misunderstand me: I completely take on board the fact that many people are constrained by time, but I also think that just as there are people who will amble home on a fat, old, gaffer, with patched and stretched sails, so are there junkies who don't mind not going particularly well to windward.  What I was trying to say is that if you feel happy with a flat sail and the lack of windward ability that this implies, there are still a heap of other advantages with JR that will in fact more than compensate for this one weakness.

    I have the greatest admiration for all that you have done to further junk rig as a realistic choice for all those people who cannot or don't want to, cross oceans.  Ease of handling makes sailing more of a pleasure when
    winds vary in strength and direction, whether it is over an afternoon sail or an ocean passage. And any rig that encourages people to sail rather than to reach for the start button must be a Good Thing.  You are one of the experienced junk sailors whose input has added so much to this new website.
  • 10 Jan 2011 05:29
    Reply # 492516 on 492059
    David Tyler wrote:
    Arne Kverneland wrote:

    This thread makes it look as if long distance cruising is what it is all about, but it isn’t like that in the real world (where people have a job). Remember, probably less than one out of 1000 sailboats over 25ft is used for trans-oceanic cruising.


    Arne, I think that your statistic doesn't seem to apply to members of the JRA. Of the 211 members of this website, 6% say they cruise full time, 16% say they cruise further than 500 miles from home, 36% say they are interested in living aboard, 47% say they are interested in long range cruising. 35% sail close to home, 23% sail within 500 miles of home, 45% are interested in daysailing, 57% are interested in weekend cruising. 
        All those numbers indicate a wide spread of activity and interest, with the long distance sailors certainly not in a tiny minority.
        I would agree with you, though, that the Flat Earth - sorry, I meant to say: Flat Sail Society are being very vocal at the moment! But here's one long distance sailor who's happy to say that he doesn't belong to that society, and who thinks that good windward performance is to be desired whatever kind of sailing you do.

    I am delighted to see the Hasler Mcleod sail restored to the current rig listing.  Thank you.  It is also great that there is such a fine mix of people and boats in the JRA - it seems to me that, despite our different approaches and rig preferences, there are more things that unite us than divide.  What matters most is that you choose a boat, rig and sailing life that gives YOU the most satisfation.  Cruising is more a state of mind than a destination.  I think Arne is very happy with his rig and it suits his cruising very well. I'd choose it too if I was sailing Arion in restricted waters.  David's rig also looks fascinating and I'd love to take a closer look at it,  but I couldn't afford it.  And I am waiting with great anticipation to hear reports of how Annie's new rig performs.  As for me, I want the simplest, lowest cost, lowest tech rig I can get.  The good thing about junk rig though, is that I can always upgrade later if I change my mind. I AM thinking of a putting joints in the lowest two battens, and not lacing the foot to the boom, (and having a stout boom!) which will give me a nice curve in the lower part of the sail, my genoa as Arne puts it.  I can use the luff hauling parrell to induce some curve in the upper three battens, as Hasler recommended.  I know from sailing my junk-rigged sistership that I will reef the first panel down at 15 knots and the second at 20, at which point I revert to a nice flat sail.  These experiments won't cost much, which is critical to me and if they complicate matters too much for my simplistic mind, I can always revert to straight battens.  I AM a bit of a flat-earthist, I admit, Joshua Slocum remains my hero. When he was caulking Spray with cotton, they told him it would crawl and he said, "Tell me how fast it will crawl, so that I can make sure to get back to port in time."  Arion might be a little slower to windward with a flat sail (though I doubt it will make any difference at sea) but I'll just carry a few more cans of baked beans to compensate.  Michael Richey, admitting that Jester was not close winded, added that he did not feel it adversely affected his cruising, though it might prolong it. I also remember watching Alan Martienssen sailing Zebedee, his flat-sailed Benford dory schooner, up the narrow channel into Cairns a couple of years ago.  He put in a lot of tacks before he got the anchor down but the fact remains, he was the only cruising boat I saw that season that sailed into that restricted anchorage.  Good luck to you all. 
  • 09 Jan 2011 13:12
    Reply # 492090 on 491766
    Annie Hill wrote: One of my wishes for the online JRA seems to be coming true: more people with miles and fewer in their armchairs are discussing the rig.  IMHO, windward ability has been to JR what capsizing is to multihulls, with far too much emphasis on this one aspect and far too little on all the advantages that also need to be taken into consideration.  Why, oh why, does no-one ever point out that rigged boats can't sail downwind efficiently, without excessive effort and dangerous tying down of sails that make a dramatic alteration of course all but impossible?  Why, indeed, don't more people point to the number of boats with triangular sails that invariably motor to windward?  What about the amazing advantage of being able to sheet the sails hard in in flat calm conditions, which prevents the boat from rolling and senses immediately the wind returns?  Flat sail or cambered - all junks benefit from these tremendous and insufficiently recognised benefits.

    It's great to hear seamen discussing the realities of cruising and voyaging rather than theories gleaned from too much reading and too little time on the water.

    Hope that doesn't sound like a rant.

    You have earned the right to rant on this subject.  However, it doesn't really sound like a rant, just "that is a summary of the case for the defence, my lud".
  • 09 Jan 2011 11:52
    Reply # 492059 on 492053
    Arne Kverneland wrote:

    This thread makes it look as if long distance cruising is what it is all about, but it isn’t like that in the real world (where people have a job). Remember, probably less than one out of 1000 sailboats over 25ft is used for trans-oceanic cruising.


    Arne, I think that your statistic doesn't seem to apply to members of the JRA. Of the 211 members of this website, 6% say they cruise full time, 16% say they cruise further than 500 miles from home, 36% say they are interested in living aboard, 47% say they are interested in long range cruising. 35% sail close to home, 23% sail within 500 miles of home, 45% are interested in daysailing, 57% are interested in weekend cruising. 
        All those numbers indicate a wide spread of activity and interest, with the long distance sailors certainly not in a tiny minority.
        I would agree with you, though, that the Flat Earth - sorry, I meant to say: Flat Sail Society are being very vocal at the moment! But here's one long distance sailor who's happy to say that he doesn't belong to that society, and who thinks that good windward performance is to be desired whatever kind of sailing you do.
  • 09 Jan 2011 10:40
    Reply # 492053 on 490656
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Stavanger, Sunday

    Annie.

                                                 HORSES FOR COURSES

    I guess we are talking a bit past each other because our different sorts of sailing call for different needs. I only do day-sailing and short coastal cruising – as the majority of sailors does. My idea of a good day’s sailing is one where the engine has seen no use. To achieve this, the boat must be able to get me home (in time) even against a headwind.

    Frankly, after the first year with Malena’s flat junk sail I was so dissatisfied with her upwind performance that I would have re-rigged her to a tall gaff rig if I had not found ways of improving her. Had she been meant for world cruising, then I would have been less concerned about this.

    This thread makes it look as if long distance cruising is what it is all about, but it isn’t like that in the real world (where people have a job). Remember, probably less than one out of 1000 sailboats over 25ft is used for trans-oceanic cruising.

    I agree with your point about all the Bm-rigged boats motoring to windward. In Stavanger one can often add the reach and run legs to the list too...

    How was it... "horses for courses" or something like that?

    Arne

    PS: Actually, in my article "Junkrig for Beginners" my first reason for going junk was that I wanted to improve the downwind sailing.

    Last modified: 09 Jan 2011 10:40 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
<< 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