SailNet Community - View Single Post - Tapered Mast vs. Standard Mast
View Single Post
post #23 of Old 01-17-2012
Jeff_H's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Posts: 7,445
Thanks: 11
Thanked 236 Times in 187 Posts
Rep Power: 10
Originally Posted by celenoglu View Post
the fractional will require more attenttion than the full. ractional rigs are much better for racing but the rig is much prone to failure therefore not recommended for shorthanded cruising.
I would somewhat disagree with the comment that fractional rigs are more prone to failure and are better suited to race boats. Most of the modern cruising designs being built today are being constructed with fractional rigs for a good reason, they are easier to handle, especially in changing conditions, being quicker to power up and down.

Similarly with their comparatively smaller headsails and again with their ability to rapidly adapt without reefing as soon, fractional rigs make an ideal single handling rig, especially when they are designed to avoid overlapping headsails.

I also disagree that Fractional rigs require more attention but here I can also see why someone might say that. As a very broad generality, fractional rigs respond more to changes in backstay tension than masthead rigs and so the backstay is ideally adjusted as windsppeds go up and down. To some that may seem exotic or may seem like adding yet another thing to pay attention to.

But I see this a little differently. When I started sailing in the 1960's, yopu almost never made outhaul adjustments after the sail was up and flying. It was pretty much set and go. Boom vangs were seen as exotic. Today most cruisers would look at a boom vang as a safety item which should be aboard, and by and large, most knowlegeable sailors will adjust the outhaul to the conditions. It would be easy to argue that having a boom vang or adjusting the outhaul requires more attention, but to me these are tools which make sailing easier and at least with the vang, makes the boat a little more forgiving.

In practice neither rig is inherently less reliable or more prone to failure. The likelihood of short service life is much more dependent on the details of the design rather than the choice of rig.

Originally Posted by captflood View Post
GREETINGS EARTHLINGS ; try to find out how old the rigging is and what is the service life of same have it all checked out by someone who knows that type of rigging then try and get it all worn out GO SAFE.
I also want to comment on Captflood's post. The problem with judging rod rigging as is being suggested above is that there is no good way to reliably judge the service life of rod rigging based on the age of the rigging. There are so many variables in the design and installation, let alone use and abuse that a rig might have been subjected to, that the only way to really determine the condition of rod rigging is by careful, removal and inspection, ideally using some of the higher tech inspection techniques, and even so, these are only short term snapshots of how much lifespan is remaining.

As mentioned above, with wire rope you are more likely to have clues that failure may be approaching. With wire, there can be isolated fatique resulting in a here one moment gone the other. As much as I like rod rigging for its lower stretch and predictable elongation characteristics, personnally I don't consider it as reliable as I would want for long-term distance cruising.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Curmudgeon at Large- and rhinestone in the rough, sailing my Farr 11.6 on the Chesapeake Bay
Jeff_H is offline  
Quote Share with Facebook
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome