MacGregorSailors.com

kurz wrote:sorry just to answer: Is a backstay mormally to trim the mast/sail and not to hold the mast?? !!!

Again, it depends on the location of the side stays and the type of mainsheet block structure installed on the boat. The mainsheet block on the M is connected to a vary stout traveler that is bolted with many large bolts directly through the Deck, into the Liner, and then into a very strong steel ladder that is then bolted again through the sole liner and into the hull. There is a reason WHY the mainsheet block structure on the M boat is so crazy over built - it is the main force pulling the boat through the water!

The side stays must also be well behind the mast to support the force of a fractional rig sail configuration.

On the X boat I think the mainsheet it just attached to the pedestal - I doubt the pedestal is strong enough to take the entire force of pulling the boat through the water.

It's also important where on the boom the mainsheet attaches - the further forward the mainsheet attaches to the boom the more force is exerted on the mainsheet and less force on the rest of the rig.

Hi Guys,

This has moved into phase two.... The insurance claim.

The assessor has looked the boat over and says the insurance company won't cover all the replacement parts.
The repairers originally advised me that any of the rigging wires could have been stressed when the mast fell, which obviously makes them weak and likely to break at sea.
So I've asked the assessor if there's a way to test the rigging for strength (without damaging it further).... If not, I want the insurance company to accept responsibility for any future rigging/mast falls, including any damage to the boat or occupants on or around the boat.

What's your thoughts on my strategy gents? ... Does anyone have any experience negotiating with insurance companies?


All the best.
Neo

It would cost more to proof load the rigging than to just replace it, as it's light rigging made with Nicopress-type terminations. And proof testing only proves that it didn't break at the force applied, at the time it was applied, but can't show any fatigue or non-visible damage. A couple of hundred or so buys all new standing rigging from BWY, complete with boom tangs and the male part of the adjusters.

Personally I would not stress on the standing rigging. If they are willing to replace it great, if not though I would not feel slighted. It does not take much pressure to break the mast when it is applied incorrectly, much less than normal sailing. Give it a good visual inspection and go with your instinct.

If you decide to change it yourself vs purchasing premade sumner has a good writeup.

http://purplesagetradingpost.com/sumner ... ng-24.html

Neo, in my experience with insurance adjusters, they are the professionals and they will negotiate. You could successfully negotiate the cost of the re-rigging less a deductible due to "betterment". The rigging is considered an item that wears out due to use (like a tire). But I would expect that they will still cover any lose if the failure reoccured.

If your mast replacement is covered by your insurance I would get a price to have one rigged and ready to go with all the hardware shipped from BWY to a delivery station in AUS, use that as your base price. You shouldn't be trying to salvage one and replace all the hardware on your time or dollar, that's why we pay for insurance. Stick to this price. Your adjuster may be willing to pay out that amount or a percentage of it in the form of a cheque; At that point it is up to you how you proceed...order new one from USA and ship or salvage/ buy bare extrusion and fit hardware yourself. DO NOT give your insurance company and adjuster other options; new one from supplier...period; the mast is made and fitted in the USA from this company and that's all there is to it. This is the most expensive option but it gives you better terms to negotiate and if they pay out all or part of you'll be in a better position to replace it and get back on the water.

Thanks gents,

That's a big help.

All the best.
Neo

[quote="sailboatmike"]Still not convinced with bending the mast and decreasing vang tension depowers, especially in a fractional rig.

I know this thread has been taken many sub threads, but to just chime in on this.

In a factional rig there is no argument - bending the mast flattens the mainsail. You'r theory of flatter = depowered is correct. The question is how to flatten a main on a fractional rig? Bend the mast. Bending the mast makes a sail flatter on a fractionally rigged sailboat. The top of the mast is pulled aft, the head-stay connection point remains stationary, below that point the mast actually moves forward, the mast base stays stationary. The luff of the sail tension is increased and the sail is flattened.

Bending a mast on a mast-head sloop does very little to a mainsail... some, but less. The main reason to increase or decrease tension on a mast-head sloop is to control head-stay tension and sail shape usually for down wind or off wind performance.

Bend it.

Ed

Having recently broken a mast the idea of putting one under tension, to bend it like this, worries the hull out of me .... and also makes no sense on the swinging mast of a 26M.

Neo wrote:Having recently broken a mast the idea of putting one under tension, to bend it like this, worries the hull out of me .... and also makes no sense on the swinging mast of a 26M.

I'm not familiar with the characteristics of a pivoting mast, so on that I can't comment. The M doesn't have a back stay in any case? I don't think inducing bend is a real option.

My meager understanding of mast bending using the backstay is that by 'pushing' the mast forward in the middle, you pull the depth out of it, making it more shallow so it doesn't develop as much lift.

The curved dashed line is the roach, since the X boats have some roach. But the solid lines represent essentially the outline of the triangle; the lines of action where there's little to no stretch or movement under tensile forces. You can see how the distance between the leech line and the bolt rope increases as the mast is bent, and that the boom drops a bit, too, pulled down as usual by the main sheet.

I know there's more to it (there's always more to it, whatever 'it' is), but this just isn't my baileywick, so simple will have to do. The boat I've spent the most time on didn't have a backstay (B&R rig), and this one isn't a speedy enough boat that I even think about such things.

Just curious.... If you locked the pivot on the mast base of a 26M (some how), so the mast could not swing starboard or port, wouldn't that de-power the main?

Neo wrote:

Highlander wrote:Nope I resolved that issue !

Well done for solving that .... I guess you need it with all those furlers too.

You're very brave with all your project .... But the complexity of your setup at the back makes my head spin
All the bars must weigh a fair amount. Have you noticed any difference in the way she handles?

All the best.
Neo

She Handles very well thx U
http://vid844.photobucket.com/albums/ab ... 0_2494.mp4

http://vid844.photobucket.com/albums/ab ... 0_2495.mp4


J

Yes today, after 2 and half months (an more hassle that n dare to speak of ), I finally took delivery of my new mast. ....Yipeeee!

It's ....
# A 4.5" section ... just like the new 26M's
# Anodized gun metal grey
# It's 5 inches loner (for a raised boom)
# A new Mast head with two built-in blocks, for main and spinnaker (maybe in the future)
# 2 internal halyards for main and spinnaker

It's so good to see my Mac with a Mast again

Also, I have new L-Brackets on the deck. These have extra ears with two holes (each side) .... What do you use the two holes for?



All the best
Neo

Turning blocks, if I remember correctly. Looking good!