Pennlaser
New Member
Best mast tie down method?
Cunningham starboard or port side?
Deck cleats useful at all?
Thanks!
-J
Cunningham starboard or port side?
Deck cleats useful at all?
Thanks!
-J
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Don't know about "best", but anything that doesn't restrict mast rotation while still not letting the mast rise more than a few cm is good enough. (I think the Rooster system fails the latter.) Mine is a 2 mm line that goes twice around the mast, once through the deck plate eyes and once above the vang tang, and tied to itself with a square knot. Any attachment of the centreboard elastic to the deck plate is best done with a separate piece of rope.Best mast tie down method?
Doesn't really matter. I have mine on port as a leftover from the pre-2001 rules era, with the rationale that it's easier to pull in on port tack, which is how you usually round the leeward mark.Cunningham starboard or port side?
Depends on how comfortable you are with holding the sheet in your tiller hand while doing other things with the other. Personally, I'd feel a little helpless without them, although about half of the top sailors of the world seem to disagree. It's something of a cultural thing, too: Aussies and Kiwis don't use them, but most Europeans do.Deck cleats useful at all?
You have showed this before, and it looks so simple and neat. But does it really have to be tight all the time to work? And if so, does it let the boom go all the way out (and stay there) even in light air?I use a triangle of shockcord hooked over the vang tang. As long as the shockcord is tight, it will not let the mast fall out
Ok, so I generalized from watching Burton and Wearn on World Sailing TV, sorryFor the record, almost all Australian Lasers have deck cleats, but some of the guys regularly competing overseas might have decided not to use them in more recent years.
Yes it does need. To be tight, but also corded tie down systems can't have to much slack. When I was measuring, the test of a tie down system was if I could lift the mast out of the mast step, if I could, then the system failed the class rules. The amount of stretch available permits the mast to. Do at least on full rotation, so whilst sailing, just going down wind is absolutely no issue. The only issue is when rigging you need it hooked over before the vang is set up, so a small issue if you put the whole rig set up, in in one move.You have showed this before, and it looks so simple and neat. But does it really have to be tight all the time to work? And if so, does it let the boom go all the way out (and stay there) even in light air?
When You say mast step is that equal to the doughnut?Yes it does need. To be tight... .... the test of a tie down system was if I could lift the mast out of the mast step...........
When You say mast step is that equal to the doughnut?
If so, following the class rule doesn't protect from breaking the tube while righting the boat.Pretty sure Alan meant mast tube
Thanks for all the responses.... much appreciated. I'm going to look at all the mast retainer solutions.
......
How are people using them now? For trimming upwind? I can't imagine that being useful.
Correct. The class rules only prevents the mast falling out of the mast step/tube. If you have a line/shock cord with to much slack it is very easy to lift the mast out with just the stretch on the luff and the high powered Cunningham purchases.If so, following the class rule doesn't protect from breaking the tube while righting the boat.
The class rule only says "To secure the mast in the event of a capsize". That can be interpreted in more than one way - like quite a few others, I've always thought that here "securing" means "not letting come out enough to damage the mast step", not just "preventing complete disengagement".The class rules only prevents the mast falling out of the mast step/tube.
Ok, as far as the other international measures I've worked with, it's been interpreted as complete disengagement. The word secure in this situation means to parent it getting loose. I fully understand you concern, as I thought that the most likely scenario for that to occur was when lift whole rigs in difficult conditions.The class rule only says "To secure the mast in the event of a capsize". That can be interpreted in more than one way - like quite a few others, I've always thought that here "securing" means "not letting come out enough to damage the mast step", not just "preventing complete disengagement".