spinnaker pole set up

[Romany 162]

Romany is a Townson 36, and I am a little unsure about the way the spinnaker pole is set up.

 

Pole uphaul as normal (ie a wire strop with s/s ring in middle), mast end of pole is to one of 2 fixed s/s D rings.

 

I have realised the downhaul is incomplete (and yes on the odd occasion I have spinnakered we have butchered our way through the things) but so far as I can work out, seems set up to go directly to outboard end of the pole via sheaves on the bow and this is the bit that has me slightly unsure.

 

On most boats I have crewed on (done the full gambit of little cruisers (22' Variant) little racers (26' 1/4 tonners), 40' lightweight racers & 48' heavy as cruisers ) the gybe procedure invariably does not include unclipping the downhaul from the pole - which I think I would have to do as it stands now.

Normal (in my experience) is that downhaul is set up as mirror of uphaul (ie with a wire strop and centrally located s/s ring) so that the pole can be gybed with minimal fuss (we hope).

 

So in your collective experience, a) is the current set up good bad or indifferent is the current set up done incorrectly (ie should it have had a movable d ring on a track so that dip pole gybing is achievable, or should I add a 'normal' downhaul as above)

 

My intention is to change the set up a little because as it stands now I have used the lazy sheet / lazy guy set up as a downhaul, and consequently when the pole is hauled aft the angle of downhaul changes from downward pull to forward and down with emphasis on forward, In doing this there is a quadrant where the pole downhaul is on the guardrails and I hate this because I hate it.

 

I was thinking I will set up a downhaul with either single or double sheave block lashed to the Samson post but I has occurred to me that this does not change the issue of having to unclip it (from old outer end) and then reclip as a gybe is performed unless a strop is added.

 

Any thoughts?

[The big T 40]

Can you fit two downhauls and fix to sail, not pole. Good in gybes where downhaul can hold sail in position working with brace/lazy sheet while pole is clipped on

[John B 106]

I'm wondering if it a dip pole setup? Is the mast end a fairly comprehensive traveller , quite long, with blocks and purchase for up and down movement?

[Crocket 12]

Did quite a few miles on a Townson boat in the 70s. Sounds like the same setup we had. The sheets also had a lighter line (10mm I think) that ran outside the lifelines to a block on each side about a metre back from the bow.

It meant that you need 2 winches loaded on the windward side - 1 for the Brace and 1 for the downhaul, which needed to be trimmed simultaneously (ease the brace, wind on the downhaul).

It seemed to be the flavour of the time and meant that the loads on the downhaul, when needed the most, were lower than having a bridle set up. Especially with the stretchy string we had in the day.

[Romany 162]

Hi - John B, no you missed a bit - there is no track on the mast. Only 2 fixed S/S D rings, so currently, I definitely do not have a dip pole system. Was wondering if I should go that way although I am inclined not to.

 

TBT & Crockett - you seem to be suggesting the same thing albeit expressed differently ie that I could use the current lazy brace (or introduce dedicated downhaul/s) as a downhaul direct to the sail or to the pole as long as it runs from toe rail or deck level forward of the mast? Tell me if I have misunderstood that.

 

I am picking up that by running from toe rail the load is consistently more downward, which gives better purchase when wanting to prevent the pole from skying? I spoke to Rick with the dodgy knee today and he reckons a bridle provides sufficient control to do the job on boats of this size/vintage - and is easily strong enuff. I tend to accept that because S 34's and Romany are similar sized/similar loads etc (although its a widely known fact that Townsons sail better, but don't tell him I said that otherwise my sail repairs will become more expensive).

 

I also recall some old sea dog telling me that the downhaul should not be that heavily loaded anyway.

[Crocket 12]

You might find that you don't actually have a lazy brace, but a sheet and downhaul. We always went from the toerail, about a metre back from the bow. Like I said, that was the fashion 35 odd years ago when the ropes seem to almost double in length every time a gust hit. Controlling it from the end of the pole rather than the middle would only have 1/2 the load on the downhaul. Not so much a problem anymore.

[Romany 162]

u may be correct. The spinnaker lines I have are all ancient 3 strand - none of this braided carry on...

 

What Townson yachts did you sail on?

[Guest]

The other advantage of the downhaul on the sail as suggested is that you have an easy retrieval line on the drops. If you spike the brace, kite flies free and unloads completely, but the clew is restrained and the sail can't go much further than behind the main. Great for shorthanded work as once spiked the kite just waits for you.

[Fish 0]

Hi Romany, we have a similar boat to you, Birdsall 37, called Charlatan, as the owner / builder wanted a Townson but Des was asking too much for the plans and the Birdsall looked the same (but sailed better and faster, of course ), hence the name.

We set up our pole system with a down haul for end to end gybing, strop from both ends of the pole with a ring in the middle, and a block and tackle type down haul tied off to a massive cross tee thingy in the middle of the foredeck ( just a fastening point).

When the pole is squared back there is very little load on the down haul. Note though we run a sheet and brace system with the brace block about mid ships on the tow rail. When the pole is back this gives a fair component of downward force as well.

 

Where things get a bit hairy is running tight with the pole forward just off the forestay. This is fine if its light, but if your pushing hard at all its a bit marginal, so we then clip a tack line type set up to hold the pole down. This is straight off the stem and gives sound control, obviously need to drop it to gybe, but if your running tight a gybe is unlikely anyway.

 

Our J is 4.9 meters or something so our pole is 5.2 I think, massive, and has scared young bowmen in the past

I think most boats dip pole gybe with a pole that big, but we don't have a mast track, like you, and just carry a can of harden up instead ( and the sheet / brace / lazy brace system).

[Romany 162]

Thanks Fish.

 

Crocketts comments seem to have hit the nail on the head because when I think about what exists on Romany we have (2 of) a thick and a thin 3 strand line of roughly equivalent length , these are spliced together and spliced onto a clip at the forward end (where it attaches to tack after going through parrots beak on the pole or just straight to the clew). The only difference from what he mentions is that I do not have blocks that are just aft of the bow - mine are on the fairlead, so that seems to be where I will change 1st. As it stands now I have to run downhaul under the pushpit when kite is shy, but as it comes aft the downhaul needs to go over the rail.

 

There is no doubt that the downhaul being on the end of the pole as opposed to on a bridle means better control (less load due to better purchase).

 

Now that I think about it the idea that Hans brought up of having a downhaul going to the tack directly (ie not to the pole) means that when the pole is unclipped the downhaul force remains until it is released (hopefully by the trimmer once boat is on the new course).

 

The simplicity of a bridle system however - as MB and Rick suggest - is not to be dismissed so maybe I will try that for a while and see what happens.

 

As for Townson boats v others - When you pay too much, you lose a little money … that is all.....

 

Fantastic amounts of experience available on this site. Thanks for your input all.

[Romany 162]

I don't remember the order of things, was the Piedy early in the design life of Des? Imagine if he'd transferred that thinking to some bigger boats..

[Gambier 0]

On Pott Black, Townson 32, we are/were set up with two single blocks on the stem for the downhauls and as others have said yes both downhaul and sheet direct to clews. pole only clipped to sheet. Original owner had a double block on the bow but that was a disaster during gybes as the two downhauls were pulling in different directions and neither wanted to move easily. never had to change sides of the pulpit for the downhauls from running shy to deep though. Is your pole the design length? unlike you we also have the baby forestay to deal with during gybes too whcih adds to the fun!! Happy to show you our system if that helps.

[John B 106]

Hi - John B, no you missed a bit - there is no track on the mast.

 

Strangely enough, this seems to be a recurring theme these days. Ah well.

 

I did actually ask Des why he went masthead after Serene and the Piedies, Probably after I made some tactful remark like ' that boat would be nice with 7/8ths'.

His answer was that it was the fashion. The ton boats and big genoas were all the rage at the time and thats what people wanted. I'm sure there was a lot more to it than that, but perhaps he wanted to keep it simple for me.