I sailed in a race last weekend and someone took some photos of us sailing.  I was looking at this shot of the spinnaker and it almost looks too small to me. 

We have the pole set fairly high to make the clew even, but the sheet end is still higher than the guy.  I think the spinnaker is fairly old.  Were the old spinnakers made too small?  Or is the ring on the mast too low?  Something is not correct with this picture.  I also have trouble keeping the pole forward it always falls aft and hits the shrouds. 

Any ideas?  I'm thinking of putting a track on the mast for the pole ring.  By the way, we won the race.  It was a pursuit race with 107 boats.  We just fended off a N/M40 by 20 seconds.  Another 100 yards and they would have passed us.

I can't seem to get the photo to appear in the message.  Anybody know if it is possible to insert a photo within a post?

Dave,

Inserting a photo should be easy. Put the url of the photo on a line by itself, then highlight it with your curser, next click the image link button in the posting box, the button looks like this;

Cheers,

Edit: Ah Dave, I see your problem. The url you entered for your photo is not correct, http://www2.hullyc/">http://www2.hullyc/ , is not a valid url nor does it include the location of the photo .

Let me know if I can help!

Edit2: I might have found the photo you're referring to;

Is this the one Dave?

Here is a link to the photo of the spinnaker.  I meant to include this in my original post.  For some reason posting the image did not work for me. 

http://www2.hullyc.org:8080/gcr2002/photos/image026.htm">http://www2.hullyc.org:8080/gcr2002/photos/image026.htm">

Paul, I think the add image pop-up window might be truncating the url that i inserted. 

Edit2

Paul, that's the photo.  Doesn't the pole angle look too high?  I would think that the pole should be more level. 

Edit3

The image post doesn't seem to be working for me. 

I click on the image icon, receive the pop-up window, insert the url and click ok, but it doesn't seem to work.  I wonder if there are some settings I need to modify?

Dave,

Cool, let's get the image thing done first though. Just edit your post, which you only have 20 minutes to do after posting, and do the following;

• highlight the line with the link to your photo
• click the image button, 2nd from right
• dialog box will pop up asking for picture url
• paste the picture url into the dialog box
• post reply

You should be good to go!

Cheers,

Quote: Originally posted by Dave on 23 September 2002

---

Doesn't the pole angle look too high?  I would think that the pole should be more level. 

---

Dave,

I would agree with your observation, and I might even add that your pole is not squared far enough.

There are 2 things Ian Bruce always drilled into about these spinakers, and Denise likes to do the same, that is to not raise the pole too high unless needed (more on that below) and to make sure to keep the pole squared.

We find the fastest setting for the pole is often at the point where it is squared so much it begins to get hard to fly. Why is this you ask, because by squaring the pole you are opening the foot of the spinaker and exposing more surface area to the wind. Look at the camber of the chute in your photo, that is very deep! Further, when the pole is not square enough, the trimmer has a tendancy to let the sheet out more, because the chute isn't luffing, thereby compounding the problem. The 'loose' sheet will also allow the clew to ride up.

As for the pole height, the arguement might be somewhat the same. If the pole is too high, the upper part of the chute becomes almost parallel to the water and offering very little drive. In general, our reference point is the pole level with water, lower in light wind and higher in heavier air. Hard to tell from the photo but I don't think we would ever have our pole that high. Don't forget that a higher pole also brings the chute closer to the boat.

Back to the subject of a high pole. Sometimes in rough seas and high winds you might want to raise the pole a bit, this allows the spinaker to 'lift' the bow out of the water a bit to make steering in waves a bit easier.

Hard to explain it all in one post...bet you get the flavour I think.

Below is a photo you can compare somewhat, but the boats are not on the same point of sail. Notice how much flatter the bottoms of the chutes are;

Cheers,

I got the image to post, I must have copied the url incorrectly in my original post.  I missed the edit window on my original post. 

It seems to me that the either the spinnaker is too short or the ring on the mast is too low.  The ring is fixed and I assume it is in the original location.  The spinnaker is an old Class spinnaker.  Is this pole angle common throughout the fleet or is something out of wack on my boat?

http://www2.hullyc.org:8080/gcr2002/photos/image026.htm"> 

Thanks for the information Paul.  I agree with everything you say about squaring the pole and pole height (lower in light air and higher in stronger winds). 

However, I have noticed that when I lower the pole the it just creates a gap between the pole-end and the spinnaker clew.  Maybe it is because we are not pulling the pole back far enough, (pulling the clew of the sail into the pole), but I've never seen anything like this in another boat.   

One thing I was always told to do is keep both clews even.  For some reason when I try to keep the clews even, the pole angle ends up looking what you see in the photo. 

I'll have all winter to ponder this.  Now I go back to frostbiting in my interclub with no jib and no chute. 

Quote: Originally posted by Dave on 23 September 2002

---

I've never seen anything like this in another boat.   

---

Dave,

Few others boats have such a long penalty pole. I would try keeping the pole squared more to begin with along with trying to keep it lower.

By sailing with the pole more squared the spinaker will feel like a different beast.

The pole ring and everything look fine. Your chute was made by Hans Fogh and he's one smart cookie.

Try the pole techniques offerred here Dave and get back to us, I think you'll have good news!

Cheers,

Hi Dave,

Just been looking at your spinn and I observe that you are flying it  too loose. As can be seen by the leech with a huge amount of twist. This would cause the chute to fly too high and give the appearance that the chute is short on hoist. I concur with Paul's comments re the pole not being squared enough either. Is your pole the class length of 11.32 feet? or has it possibly been modified for PHRF which would be shorter.

If you carry the pole further back and fly the sheet so that the clew does not go around the forestay you'll find the chute will look much larger. Always verify your adjustments with your knot meter to see which is faster.

I also notice that this chute looks like an early all purpose spinnaker. Not a windward/leeward chute like the current ones Paul has shown you. The windward/Leeward chutes are much deeper than the original "All Purpose" chutes. Depending on what type of courses you sail will determine what type of chute you should use. In Canada for our class racing it's all windward/leeward courses.

Bill, Dave and Others

Good posts....

A few notes to the PHRF guy's out there. We have found the the class kite is a very good all purpose kite.. ie fast in most conditions, however if you do want to add to your downwind inventory then consider a couple of other options.

1. A 0.5oz running kite.. in the light stuff you will find you will be able to sail just as fast but  5-10 degrees lower. Even more important for w/l courses you will be able to jibe more easily.

2. A flat reacher kite... we use this from 50-60deg apparent in upto 6-8 knots of wind; good for passage type races. This kite is full hoist (33ft) but only 17 feet girth with narrow shoulders. We also use this kite in heavy breeze as it is much easier to steer aggressively in order to promote surfing.

3. A blast reacher asym.... we use this from 60-90 apparent in upto 20-25 knots of breeze. This kite is full hoist but is cut with a very high clew and has a spectra rope luff. we run this off a tack line forward of the forestay. No use for standard w/l courses.

Chris,

Good points on the chutes for PHRF.

The 0.5oz chute can really make a diiference in the light stuff, especially if there is some wave action that causes heavier chutes to shake out their air.

As class racing is predominately winward/leeward courses, the chute are optimised for that. Though the chutes do reach ok, it's not their strongest point of sail. If you do a lot of reaching then you may want to take Chris's suggestion here and get a specialised chute.

Heaver and/or smaller chutes have their purposes so there may be advantage in having some sort of 'bullet proof' chute.

When PHRF is your main type of racing, of course you need a valid certificate meaning all these things and others need to be measured and taken into account.

Cheers,

I will probably buy a new .5 oz runner this winter.  This was my first year with the boat and I blew my sail budget on a new main and genoa.  Most of the important sailing I do is windward leeward in light to moderate air, so the .5 oz runner would make a big difference. 

The blast reacher sounds like fun, but I don't do enough offshore racing to justify it. 

Dave did not comment on the wind speed when his photo was taken but if the comments about high wind = high pole are taken literally then it was blowing some.   We have found that when it is windy (18 knots plus) the twing line on the sheet can be partially engaged.  This seems to flatten the chute a little and reduce rock 'n' roll effects.  Bill & Paul  will probably want to comment on that.

It was probably blowing around 12 - 15 at the time.  It was very shifty and one of the reasons we did not have the pole as squared as it could have been was because it was so shifty (we sail inside a small bay within Boston Harbor). 

I think one of the other issues I may have is that I don't have twings that are easily adjustable.   I just have some cheek blocks on each rail.  The crew needs to open the block and physically place the guy in the block. 

Where do people lead their twing lines to?  I was thinking somewhere near the where the doghouse meets the deck at the cockpit would be a good place.   Unfortunately, the only Laser 28 I have seen is the one I purchased and alot of the extra little rigging was removed. 

Our twinglines are very important part of our 'chute control so they are always rigged whatever the weather.  Over the last few years quite a lot of thought in our fleet has gone into how to make them as light as possible.  Each spinnaker sheet is passed through a small bullet block(Harken 082).  The becket of this block is attached to a thin (1/8") poly line which in turn runs to a swivel bullet (Harken 166) attached to the second stanchion base and thence across the side deck to a cam cleat as you suggest at the junction of the deck and cabin bulkhead.   During gybing and heavy weather both twinglines are engaged.  The rest of the time it is only the guy which has the twing taut.  I will try to find a photo that shows it