Ideas for Improving the Top section

but remember what was said earlier, they tried it and had problems with it because not all lower sections are exactly the same size, and it is hard to get a good fit

That should also be the case with the current sleeve, and everyone seems to make that work just fine. Besides, it's easier to adjust the diameter of a plastic molding to obtain a good fit than to adjust the diameter of the aluminum mast.
 
but I think they ( Vanguard) would want to make one size, not multiple different sizes for ease of sale and production
 
That should also be the case with the current sleeve, and everyone seems to make that work just fine. Besides, it's easier to adjust the diameter of a plastic molding to obtain a good fit than to adjust the diameter of the aluminum mast.

Exactly. You design and build the 'socket' to account for the tolerance stack up of the upper and lower sections, bare, and let people use tape for the fine tuning/shimming of the interface. It has to be less expensive to produce an injection molded 'socket', than to produce the upper section injection molded piece (actually 2 pieces), and then the labor to align, drill, and rivet into place.

Even if the 'socket' pulls out of the lower and stays attached to the upper at the end of the day, it has to be a better setup than the current approach.
 
I still think the best way would be for all top sections, for 4.7/radial/full to be carbon/composite/whatever and just have the sleeve's molded in like the test models are now. Can't get much better then that.
 
Exactly. You design and build the 'socket' to account for the tolerance stack up of the upper and lower sections, bare, and let people use tape for the fine tuning/shimming of the interface. It has to be less expensive to produce an injection molded 'socket', than to produce the upper section injection molded piece (actually 2 pieces), and then the labor to align, drill, and rivet into place.

Even if the 'socket' pulls out of the lower and stays attached to the upper at the end of the day, it has to be a better setup than the current approach.

That's right. I didn't mean that they would produce different sizes. Also, if the version where the socket stays attached to the bottom section is used, then it could be press-fit into the bottom section at the factory, the plastic deforming as it is inserted to take into account variations in the bottom section diameter. Then the top section could just be slid into and out of the socket during rigging/derigging. Either way, the system must allow for a tight connection between the top and bottom section so that the mast has as smooth of a bend as possible.
 
if it was press fit, and not removable (maybe?), if and when they happen to break, that would possibly mean you would have to replace your bottom section. I personally feel it would be better if the cup were removable for maintenance and such
 
if it was press fit, and not removable (maybe?), if and when they happen to break, that would possibly mean you would have to replace your bottom section. I personally feel it would be better if the cup were removable for maintenance and such

You could always cut it out. I had to replace my boom gooseneck plug recently and it wouldn't just come out after the rivet was drilled out. I had to cut it out from the inside.
 
I think adhesive is a good idea, but it the adhesive fails the top section would fall into the bottom section.
Certainly better than the alternative; your top section breaks because of a rivet hole... you lose the top section AND your sail! If adhesive slipped, you'll lose some sail trim. I'll take the latter.
 
lets just hope that when the cup breaks, and the top section slams though the lower section as it hits the rivet ends on the inside of the lower section of the gooseneck and vang tang, that the upper doesn't do damage to itself, or the lower, or punch through the boat

this cup/plug just seems a little shaky to me, I still think it's better to use what we have now, and wait for carbon/composite/whatever uppers where the cup/plug/collar are just molded on
 
I concur

what we need is a 2 piece wing mast, that connects bayonet style, with a molded in sail track instead of doing the stupid sail sock, a Finn style gooseneck, and a molded on vang tang of sorts
 
tell that to everyone else, they don't seem to like it!

I've had that idea for a long time now, and it's nice to see that such a forward thinking individual as yourself Saw can agree with me
 
But how would it be implemented? Are you going to tell everyone that they have to go out and buy a whole new rig to remain competitive? Where is the advantage for the average sailor? What will it do to the many Laserers who just club race and really don't care about going fast? Why is anyone who really cares about going fast sailing Lasers anyway? What's wrong with the pocket luff anyway - if find it's easier to take good care of my good sails with a pocket luff than with a luff groove. What about the extra cost of a more complicated extrusion?

I'd have no problems with a tough 'glass/carbon tube but if you want to change the rest of the rig, just go and buy a Moth, Finn or OK.
 
If they don't care about going fast, they won't care about getting beat.

As Reon says, there's a difference between choosing to sail a slow boat (Laser) and wanting to sail a boat slower than your competition. Even the perception that your boat is too slow is a major hindrance to stop people improving.....actually making existing boats/rigs slower would be a real problem.

I'm probably typical - I got back into Lasers after time in cats (a type of F16, which is faster for length than a Tornado), International Canoe and windsurfers, but I'm happy to lose lots of speed to sail a Laser as long as my Laser is the same speed as everyone else's.
 
I don't know a Laser sailor that has not broken at least one top section. If you are serious about your racing, you (a general "you", not a specific one) too either have already broken one, or you will. When you do break one, that would be the time to buy the proposed "better" one. Or, buy the new one before the top section breaks, and sell it, or make a boom out of it. Either way, sooner or later, a Laser racer will buy a replacement top section. If a carbon one was the only choice, it would be accepted, and we'll still have the sail to complain about. The logical answer would be to offer a socket sleeve for your current top section to fit in for about $20, and go to a better sail that would last longer, even if it cost more, which it should'nt.
Amazing, that the Laser is such a great, popular boat, but with so many problems that have been around for such a long time. I think the Pro upgrades have made the sail problem worse, since it's so much easier to crank on everything.
 
if the bottem plug and sleeve for the top section togther cost 16.95 (8.50 and 8.45) there is not way that this supposed socket sleeve/ cup/ plug would cost $20, you probably lookin at between $30 to $50
 
I don't know a Laser sailor that has not broken at least one top section.

Also, I have never sailed owned boat where I did not need to replace the mast at some point (broken, bent, stress fractured, whatever - and on a fractional rig 38' it get expensive). Of course nobody likes having to pay for a replacement mast and repairs but are Lasers particularly bad in this regard. It certainly does happen in other boats as well.

Ian
 
Also, I have never sailed owned boat where I did not need to replace the mast at some point (broken, bent, stress fractured, whatever - and on a fractional rig 38' it get expensive). Of course nobody likes having to pay for a replacement mast and repairs but are Lasers particularly bad in this regard. It certainly does happen in other boats as well.

Ian

i sailed a 505 for 13 years with the same mast....... also had two 125's with the same mast for 16 years.... when i bought the laser it came with a top section and a broken top section :rolleyes:
 
i sailed a 505 for 13 years with the same mast....... also had two 125's with the same mast for 16 years.... when i bought the laser it came with a top section and a broken top section :rolleyes:

I sailed 5o5s and Fireballs for @ 20 years replacing a mast approximately every other year. We sail in a shallow tidal harbour and the usual breakage was caused by sticking the mast in the sand with wind over tide the mast digs in and the hull gets blown over the top. Whilst I have sailed the lased a similar amount of time I have broken a number of booms and numerous daggerboards but never a top section - there's your luck!
 
but should sticking the mast into the mud count in this argument? under normal stress conditions a 505 mast does not snap (usually) whereas a laser mast under normal conditions can snap?
 
but should sticking the mast into the mud count in this argument? under normal stress conditions a 505 mast does not snap (usually) whereas a laser mast under normal conditions can snap?

Where I sail "sticking the mast into the mud" definitely counts as sailing under normal conditions. I do see your point but having had no experience of top mast failure I am surprised at how often it comes up. I have seen them fail at open meetings but not as often as booms failing. In general at windy opens I have heard of far less instances of retirment through any form of gear failure than at regattas of other classes. Generally I think the boat is pretty robust but I guess I've just been lucky with top masts. However, after this speech I best order a replacement now!
 
Where I sail "sticking the mast into the mud" definitely counts as sailing under normal conditions. I do see your point but having had no experience of top mast failure I am surprised at how often it comes up. I have seen them fail at open meetings but not as often as booms failing. In general at windy opens I have heard of far less instances of retirment through any form of gear failure than at regattas of other classes. Generally I think the boat is pretty robust but I guess I've just been lucky with top masts. However, after this speech I best order a replacement now!

dont get me wrong i personally think the laser is excellent ... i have not personally had a damaged laser mast either .. i am just pointing out a different point of view... plus i think that ... people might choke me for this ... the top section is not expensive.
 
Re: Top section

Clive,
The 'cup' idea would also potentially permit both sections of the mast to be made watertight - so there is a possibly capsize/safety/rig recovery advantage as well
 
Re: Top section

Glasky,
You are right, that is another potential benefit of that solution. Overall, I believe the cup design provides a cost effective solution to one of the prominent problems of our one design boat.
 
Re: Top section

Perhaps it helps to state the problems ?

1. Inconsistent sections resulting in changes in stiffness - IIRC this is caused by both material spec and the dies producing a thicker section the more they are used..

2. Breaking at the collar caused by the hole thru the spar for the rivet.

3. Perm. bends caused by both mis-use and inconsistent material


Anything else ?


IMHO, The class should fix #2 right now, that doesn't need a change to a composite spar, I believe there was a proposal for a change that would eliminate having to drill the section. Any progress on that ?

I don't see #1 and #3 getting solved if we stay with aluminum.
Why not move the rivet down to the small diameter part of the collar? You could even use two (countersunk) rivets. At this location they'd be below the top of the bottom section and much less likely to break.
 
Why not move the rivet down to the small diameter part of the collar? You could even use two (countersunk) rivets. At this location they'd be below the top of the bottom section and much less likely to break.
 
Sorry. I see the "move the rivet" idea was discussed much earlier. Regarding adhesive failure of a glued joint, wrapping duct tape 4-5 times around the top section immediately above the collar would prevent telescoping as long as the collar itself didn't fail, just the adhesive bond.
 
Using $.25 worth of duct tape to prevent catastrophic damage to a $500 sail in the event of a rivet failure (present design) or adhesive failure (possible new design) is prohibited? I was NOT talking about fairing the collar to the mast, just adding enuff tape so the mast couldn't slide thru the collar in the event of a failure. This would only take 4-5 turns and would not remotely come close to fairing the junction. If this is really "unlawful", then I suppose sealing the hull/deck joint to prevent leaks and putting a bit of sail tape at the ends of the batten pockets to prevent batten loss (or for that matter sewing them in if one chose) are also illegal since they are not specifically allowed in Section 3. Such positions seem silly to me since none of these alterations can possibly increase boat speed unless the intent of the rule is to force sailors to "roll the dice" poor designs and/or sloppy manufacturing.

BTW, I looked up the test results on Scotch-Weld material. When testing the shear strength of a joint bonding plastic to aluminum, in most cases the substrate (ie, the plastic) failed before the bond failed. So strength is apparently not an issue. However, the appln insts call for sanding both surfaces first. If this scratches thru the anodizing, then a potentially serious corrosion problem could well result if the joint were not perfectly sealed.
 

Back
Top