Our new light weather sail on the loft floor
One of the things we like most about the OVNI 435 is the well-stayed cutter rig. In light of experience aboard our previous boat we opted for a yankee (jib-topsail) rather than the standard roller genoa knowing that the yankee maintains its shape and drive far better when well rolled, and is stable and easy to handle when poled out. However, we knew that the trade-off would be a loss of light air performance, but felt that this was a suitable compromise that we could address in the future, once we’d got some miles under our belt and decided on the best course of action. As we don’t want to use our engine any more than we have to, and don’t have huge fuel tanks in any case, this wasn’t an option, but a must.
Having put some miles on, it was clear that we had to do something to address the boat’s main weakness, which was in less than 10 knots of wind when our heavy sails and cruising hull lines conspired against her.
The fix for off the wind sailing was straightforward, and we went for an asymmetric kite (spinnaker) mounted on a gennaker furler, set from a short bowsprit. This set up works well for winds from slightly forward of the beam to broad reaching, and is very easy to handle.
We then looked at what would be the best option with the wind farther forward of the beam, gradually leaning towards a Code 0, set in the same way as the spinnaker.
While over-wintering in Camaret in northwest France last year, we moved towards our new buy. In the main, I prefer to work with a smaller, local sailmaker if possible, as I find they tend to be more receptive to owner’s input, and (on a practical level) they are also close by when the sail is first tried out, which makes any modifications necessary easier to achieve.
So, I approached the local sailmaker, La Camaretoise, run by the charming Marco and Julie, who, with the benefit of a circumnavigation in their own boat behind them, were well placed to advise and enable us to achieve our aims. When I said I wanted a Code 0, they laughed and said no, I didn’t, too costly, prone to damage, hard to handle, not so effective with our relatively low aspect rig etc, so we were off to a good start!
Code 0 or Lightweight Genoa?
After several lengthy chats, with me returning to the Code 0, and them gently putting their own case, the message began to sink in. To start with, there were a number of practical factors to be considered. The first being that in order for us to get the best from the Code 0 upwind we’d have to convert the spinnaker halyard to a 2:1 purchase, and weld a plate on to our bow near the waterline to attach a bobstay to the end of the bowsprit to take the additional strain generated in upwind mode. This would, in turn, make life difficult with our Rocna anchor and its rollbar. Further, our gennaker furling gear, whilst fine for offwind work with our spinnaker, was marginal size-wise for use with a Code 0, due to the higher load factor, and would probably need replacement. And taking into account the sophisticated taffeta cloth and substantial size of the Code 0 we were now looking at a serious amount of expenditure.
But what we did have already was a second ‘lazy’ forestay that attaches just behind the roller furler, with its own dedicated mast fitting and halyard, from which we can set a second headsail for downwind work. Marco was adamant that we should go for a large light weather genoa (around 155%), with a low foot, which would not only give us more power and pointing ability in light conditions, but would provide plenty of drive with the sheets eased on a close reach, at around half the cost of the 0. And, in the end, that was what we went for.
The New Sail
The new sail is made in cross cut lightweight Hydranet which they advised was the most durable option, and uses conventional piston hanks for attachment. Due to the long parallel spreaders of our rig, the sail is slightly fuller cut than it would be on a more recent swept spreader boat, but it has good shape and responds well to tweaking.
Advantages
We’re delighted to find that upwind with the new sail Pèlerin is much faster and points higher. Reaching the sheet is led through an adjustable barberhauler mounted at the toerail, to bring the clew outboard and down and so maintain drive in the upper panel of the sail, with excellent results–so far so good.
Draw Backs
On the downside, the new genoa is time consuming to move around and set, although not much more so than the spinnaker on its furler, especially when that entails installing the bowsprit. But at least the new sail is inboard, and so things are less precarious for the crewman than out at the bowsprit.
Like all of these large low cut sails, visibility forward is drastically reduced, so whoever is on watch has to be sure to keep a far more physical and active watch to look out for other vessels or fishing gear.
Tacking is not too bad as long as we remove the detachable staysail stay. We’ve also had to go to considerable lengths to reduce the effects of chafe along the guardwires, pulpit and spreader ends. And whilst it’s another big item to stow, Julie made us a really good zipped bag in which we can stow the sail folded in three to minimise the space required.
It Pays To Listen
We can now keep the boat moving well with the wind forward of the beam in light airs (up to 8 knots), which was the main objective, and we hope to gain a little more with the installation of our new feathering prop. And whilst it may be true that we might have gained more with a Code 0 when reaching, the genoa almost certainly has the edge upwind.
So whilst we’ve taken what some might consider to be a step back from the cutting edge, so far it is a compromise that works for us. And all credit to Marco and Julie for not just telling me what I wanted to hear, but giving good unbiased advice to enable the right decision to be made for our needs–for which I owe them many thanks. And whilst we might have got a cheaper sail by ordering from an ‘offshore’ loft, I’d have my reservations as to the wisdom of doing so for such a one-off sail.
But I still like the idea of the Code 0, and wouldn’t rule out the idea of trying one in the future. Maybe once they become more widely used (or not), we’ll look again.
What is your experience with light air sails in general or Code 0 sails in particular? Please leave a comment.
John November 8, 2010 at 10:40 am
Really interesting post, Colin.
I have always thought that large overlapping genoa jibs were a poor idea on cruising boats. In fact one of the first things I did when I bought “Morgan’s Cloud” was to sell the #1 and #2 genoa jibs and rig, as you have, as a cutter.
But, “Morgan’s Cloud” is set up as a true cutter with a larger fore triangle than a sloop. Also, she has a relatively large rig, particularly by European standards, so she will sail well down to about 6 knots true wind as long as the wind stays forward of the beam. (When it goes aft, we hoist an asymmetric spinnaker in a sock, too.)
My point being that what would not work on MC due to her size and big rig–Phyllis and I would not even be able to sheet in a 155% genoa after a tack, due to the loads–works great on “Pèlerin”.
This is just another instance that proves that in this complex game there are no right or wrong answers…only the right answer for a given boat and crew. Sounds like you nailed it for you.
Further, we too have toyed with the thought of a Code 0 for some years. But I think your article has cured us of that. The thought of the loads on MC of such a sail, and what would happen if the wind came up suddenly catching us with the sail up are truly frightening!
Bob V November 8, 2010 at 5:55 pm
Hello Colin,
I have been following your writings since you commissioned ‘pelerin’. Did you ever consider a parasailor chute like Jimmy Cornell used for years with great success?
Regards, Bob
Colin Speedie November 9, 2010 at 7:59 am
Hi John
The genoa certainly works well for us – we were out two days ago flying it for the first time with the new feathering prop and the results were really pleasing, especially reaching when we would normally struggle. And as it is only designed and built for truly light conditions the loads are never too high for us with our relatively small rig.
Bob, our original plan was to buy a Parasailor, but the price was way too high. If it had been something like twice the price, then we’d have gone for it, but as it was more than 4 x the price of a conventional spinnaker we thought it was simply too much. I know that Jimmy Cornell is a big fan, and that certainly recommended the sail to us, but equally I’ve spoken to Parasailor owners since who were less convinced.
Best wishes
Colin
pete & sally November 19, 2010 at 12:52 pm
I have just been reading a piece about fore sails by Garry Hoyt. I found it interesting but was disappointed that I couldn’t e-MAIL HIM WITH 2000 QUESTIONS I HAD. I am interested to know if it is possible to change a mast head rig for a 9/10 rig or a 7/8 rig. The reason for this is I like the big main and a self tacking Jib more than a genoa, also Hoyt’s jib boom is a brilliant idea which I have tried on a friend’s yacht and couldn’t believe the difference it made to downwind sailing with a fractional rig so any ideas you folks have would be welcomed.
john November 19, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Hi Pete and Sally,
There is a lot to be said for large mainsail small jib rigs. Having said that, changing a rig’s proportions is a project with a lot of potential problems. Basically you would be moving the center of effort of the sailplan and risking radically unbalancing the boat.
I think that if you really wanted such a rig, the best thing, and probably cheaper too, would be to sell your present boat and buy one that is rigged this way.
Also, I am not a big fan of jib booms of any type on offshore boats, particularly large ones. Just too dangerous in a sea way.
mike November 30, 2010 at 4:41 pm
Hello Sir, I enjoyed your article. I would advise against a Code 0 because it’s not a sail that you can leave unattended under Autopilot. Especially in light winds you will often see the sail collapse with the yacht’s rolling or surfing (well accelerating) on a wave. Unless some one is steering to keep it full or tending the sheet it will soon fail due to the repeated SNAP of filling with wind. On a delivery we ran one for two days but didn’t even make the Canarys before blowing it entirely, then forced to sail Trans-Atlantic with nothing lighter than 9 OZ. Dacron
Dave Benjamin February 6, 2013 at 4:02 pm
While a true code zero would be a poor choice for a cruising yacht, our CLASS (Cruisers Light Air Sail Solution) which is a purpose built light air sail flown from a foil-less furler in the same fashion as a code zero has proved itself quite capable of being left up for days with an auto-pilot on.
Colin Speedie February 6, 2013 at 7:22 pm
Hi Dave
I like the sound of your CLASS sail, and we probably would have opted to fly our hybrid sail from a furler, except that the furler we had (for our asy spi) was maybe on the small side for an upwind sail, and we also liked the idea of having a spare stay in the event of the main reefing gear having a problem.
Having used it for a while, it works fine, and maybe most importantly behaves well in an ocean swell. But I’d have to say, if I had the time (and money!) again, I’d probably go for a furler – they’re so versatile, and make stowing the sail so easy. And I see no reason why one wouldn’t function well inside the forestay.
Ultimately, it’s about a sail you can really use, isn’t it, not some decorative, expensive thing that just looks the part?
Best wishes
Colin
Dave Benjamin February 6, 2013 at 11:36 pm
Colin,
I wish we had known you back then as we likely could have supplied the CLASS with a furler for about the same or less as you spent for the genoa. Hydranet in crosscut version is really no better than a good Dacron when you dig into the testing numbers. Hydranet is also quite expensive. We like the radial version of Hydranet for a performance cruising sail but Hydranet of either variety seems overkill for a light air genoa.
While a 2:1 halyard is nice to have, it’s not necessarily mandatory on a cruising boat. We think of the CLASS as a sail to fly up until the point where the jib or genoa can take over and deliver similar performance. On a race boat where a 2:1 halyard is mandatory, a code zero would be carried beyond that point because it could translate into better boatspeed, particularly when the boat has a hull that can plane. It’s important that we don’t apply race boat thinking to a cruising application that has little in common.
As for tacking inside the forestay, I have seen that done. In fact there’s an article floating around on my computer about some people who did that with a drifter flown from a Facnor on something like a Tayana 37.
There are some inexpensive sprit kits available that are well worth considering. As for creating a point to attach the furler on an anchor platform, it can be as as simple as adding a bale. It’s important to insure that the anchor platform can sustain the upward force.
Here’s what a customer reported about his experiences with a CLASS on a Catalina 42 (12.8m) after sailing from San Francisco to Mexico.
“I really, really like the CLASS! It worked great and was super easy to handle. Furling and unfurling were total non events even when we left it up once into a mid20′s breeze. Most of the time we were nearly dead down wind so the sail spent a lot of time poled out and much of that with the main furled. Under that configuration we saw boat speeds equal 2/3 to 3/4 of the wind speed – 5 knots in 8 knots of wind and 6 to 7 knots in 10 knots. Combine that with the ease of handling and I couldn’t have been happier. Mark was on board as crew and he was totally sold on it also. I will be surprised if he doesn’t call you to get the same setup for his boat.”
Colin Speedie February 7, 2013 at 12:51 pm
Hi Dave
The Hydranet option was as much to do with the light weight cloth, I believe, and the sail wasn’t too expensive in reality.
Plus, we wanted a sail we could go upwind with (as high as possible) where we had a real weakness. We probably couldn’t have achieved that with a 0 or free flying sail. We can get closer to the wind with this sail than we ever can with the yankee, which in flat water is a real asset.
Also, we do have bowsprit, which is fine for the asy, but wouldn’t have coped with the loadings of a free flying sail sharp up to the wind, without (a) replacing the spi block plate at the masthead (a piece of junk on our boat) (b) welding a plate near the waterline to take a spectra bobstay and (c) installing a 2:1 halyard – the cost just kept going up and up.
The system we have works brilliantly for our boat, and does what we needed it to do. Our circumstances were peculiar – Ovni’s aren’t the sharpest boats upwind. For everything other than upwind, I’d agree that a good cruising hybrid ’0′ is a really good way to go, and we’d love one.
Best wishes
Colin
Dave Benjamin February 7, 2013 at 2:02 pm
Colin,
Hydranet is not appreciably lighter than a regular Dacron. There’s an incremental difference but it’s basically just a Dacron with some Dyneema added for strength.
I’ve previously written about our disdain for the Yankee. Bob Perry wrote an excellent piece that I’ve pasted in below this paragraph. I think a better solution for your boat and most cruising monohulls is a conservatively sized genoa on the furler and a CLASS for when things go light. We find that in really light air, that the CLASS far out performs any genoa. Although you can’t point as high with a sail that has a free flying luff, the added speed gets you to the destination quicker 90% of the time.
Here’s Bob Perry explaining why we’re not fans of the yankee:
Bob Perry on headsails – (this is pasted verbatim from a post on sailing anarchy and was posted in response to a question about clew height):
“I drew it that way because at the time most cutters carried high clewed yankees. It was traditional. But if you look at the area of the high clewed yankee and the center of pressure you can see that retaining the same sail area and dropping the clew will drop the center of pressure and result in a lower heeling moment. Over time I have grown away from high clewed sails. My own rule of thumb is never have a jib clew higher than you can easily reach when the boat is heeled past 20 degrees. The yankee with the lower clew will be far more effective without the staysail to “fill in the hole”. If I owned your boat and I was after a new headsail I’d have it cut like a genoa with the clew just above the lifelines. This would be a far more versitile sail than a high clewed yankee. A high clewed yankee and mainsail flown without the staysail is not a good combo.”
John February 7, 2013 at 4:26 pm
Hi Colin and Dave,
I have to jump in here on the high clew yankee issue. While Perry is right that a low cut sail is more efficient up-wind without the staysail, he completely misses the point, because a true cutter carries the staysail any time the wind is forward of the beam. And in this case the combination is, when properly tuned, very fast, particularly in swell.
In fact the total area of our cutter rig is only a little smaller than a number one genoa, but infinitely more flexible and easier to handle.
In fact we have won our class twice in the Bermuda race and in one case had best corrected time in fleet using this rig. On the last day of one of these races we sailed through several boats carrying #1s that gave us time, on the wind in light air.
Then when reaching and broad reaching in big breeze the high cut yankee is way more efficient than a low cut sail because the sheeting point is further aft resulting in a less hooked leach. This is what we used to call a blast reacher in my racing days.
The other big advantages to the high cut yankee is that it does not scoop water on a reach and you don’t need to change the sheet lead as you roller reef, like you will have to with a low cut sail.
Of course one still needs bigger and lighter sails off the wind in light to medium air, but you need that whatever height your clew is. On MC we set an asymmetrical spinnaker or a Perkins, depending on the level of energy aboard
.
We get away without a light air headsail for going up wind because we have a big rig in the boat and are more willing to motor than Colin is. Colin’s boat, as is typical of European boats, has a smaller rig in relationship to her weight (it blows way harder over there) so her needs are different when up wind, hence the genoa, but that does not alter the benefits of a high cut yankee jib, high or low, Colin would still need the added area when it gets light.
Davew Benjamin February 7, 2013 at 6:13 pm
John,
I think it may be rigged as a cutter, however the boat seems to be designed as a staysail sloop, at least in this line drawing I found on the internet.
http://sailboatdata.com/viewrecord.asp?class_id=5364
John February 7, 2013 at 6:22 pm
Hi Dave,
That does not, in my experience, alter the fact that as long as the fore-triangle is of a reasonable size and a staysail is carried when going to windward, it is a very efficient rig that is much more flexible offshore than the sloop.
Inshore, where frequent tacks are required, not so much.
Point being that I simply don’t agree that a cutter rig is old fashioned and has been superseded.
Dave Benjamin February 7, 2013 at 5:11 pm
John,
You’re bringing up some excellent points, however if I’m not mistaken, the Ovni that Colin owns is not cutter rigged.
For most boats, particularly those that are not true cutters like MC, a genoa of moderate to minimal overlap with a clew height just over head level will do a superb job. There’s no tendency for the sail to “scoop water” and the sail can work acceptably well both upwind and reaching. If we’re using a CLASS, then we’re not using the genoa off the wind in lighter airs. What we’re able to do is cover a wide range of wind strength and angles with a very simple two sail arrangement, both of which are easily managed and economical. The size of the CLASS is not much larger than a traditional #1 genoa but where it’s getting the performance from is the “shoulder” we’ve engineered into it and the fact we’re using a cloth that weighs a third or fourth of what most genoas would weigh.
For a true cutter, there’s a variety of arrangements. I just did a complete inventory on a cutter rigged ketch and for that project we ended up with a Yankee foresail that had the clew a bit lower than a traditional yankee. The staysail is the self tending variety on a boom. The client reported back after 1200 or 1300 miles that the boat was performing well.
I think a yankee on a boat like the Ovni which is already compromised upwind further hobbles the boat. I would have suggested a different approach. There’s certainly nothing wrong with the traditional approach but I think that we have a lot of materials and hardware options that simply didn’t exist when many of these boats were originally designed.
John February 7, 2013 at 6:08 pm
Hi Dave,
Ah, I think you and I are actually closer in our opinions than it would appear from the above because Colin’s boat is rigged as a true cutter.
I agree entirely with you that a high cut jib without a low cut staysail under it is very inefficient and not a good idea.
Now we could start on Jib Booms, one of the true horrors of the sea, in my opinion.
Dave February 7, 2013 at 9:11 pm
John,
I’m not suggesting anyone scrap their cutter rig. I’d simply suggest that a cutter rig and sailplan is best employed on a boat designed as a cutter.
I like solent rigs. The inner headsail can be a high aspect sail. A traditional low aspect staysail is much less efficient than a high aspect sail of similar size. Think back to the “good old days” when a race boat would have a #3 or #4 headsail that was 80 or so on the hoist. Now those sails tend to have taller hoist with less overlap. The way we usually explain the difference is that taller hoists deliver power without the heeling moment of a sail with shorter hoist and greater overlap.
Colin Speedie December 1, 2010 at 9:58 am
Hi Mike
Interesting point that you make, and one I can easily understand. We’ve had our new sail up in light airs with a reasonable swell, and so far, so good, it’s been stable enough.
As we generally only sail two handed, the need for a sail that can look after itself is paramount, as although Lou likes to hand steer, I’m less inclined!
Best wishes
Colin
Martin October 18, 2012 at 10:59 am
Hi Colin, interesting approach and you’r right to listen to sailmakers! I’m following a similar reflection in refitting a 34-foot Romanée (French-built aluminum sloop from the late 1970s; displacing +/- 6 ton; you must have seen a few when in Britanny.) I’m very tempted to get rid of the roller reefing genoa (good for furling, bad for reefing), and replace it with good old-fashioned hanked-on sails. Sailcloth and cut have made a lot of progress. So the thinking goes: 110 or 120% genoa + solent jib to cover average sailing conditions. Orc-type jib for anything above that. Light-air conditions: We’ve got spinnakers so off-the wind situations are covered. Close-hauled: code-zero or light-air genoa. I agree with you on the latter choice; much smaller loads and easier short-handed. But I only have 1 forestay. So, the idea I’m toying with is to have the genoa free-standing, with a doubled-up halyard and furling system (similar to what you have for your asymmetric kite. In French: drisse mouflée et emmagasineur). The tack would be right behind the forestay (which makes for easy tacking). I wonder what you think about the combination.
Best
Martin
Romanée Isatis
If you’re curious about the Romanée; check out http://pouvreau.romanee.free.fr
Colin Speedie October 18, 2012 at 4:37 pm
Hi Martin
I know the Romanee, and they’re good boats.
Re your thoughts on sails, I see no reason why you couldn’t do as you suggest, and run the furling gear and lightweight sail attached just aft off the forestay. We certainly considered that, as we already had a furler (for our asy spinnaker) but in the end opted for a separate stay and tensioner with the sail on hanks. There were a number of reasons for this, most of which you have outlined. It works well, and we have an ‘emergency’ forestay. The only thing I would (now) have done differently would have been to have the inner forestay in Dynex Dux and with soft hanks, but they really weren’t available at that time.
Another option (if your roller furler is in good nick) might be to fit the lightweight genoa on that, and fit a ‘foc de brise’ inside it, and don’t bother reefing the genoa, just furl it up and go straight to a strong, flat upwind sail.
Anybody out there tried a furler inside the forestay?
Kindest regards
Colin
Martin October 21, 2012 at 4:42 am
Thanks for your reply, Colin. A “soft” removable, inner forestay with soft hanks is indeed an appealing idea. Hmm… You got me thinking. But then why not rig the light genoa on the main forestay?
Re your suggestion of having the light-weather genoa on the roller/furler and the heavier working sails inside: the downside is that I’d end-up sailing with a furled light genoa most of the time. My idea is to have a working (heavier) genoa (hanked on) and a light genoa (ghoster if you wish) for the really light stuff.
As many late 70s, 1980s boats, the Romanee was designed with large, overlapping headsails. With contemporary materials, it’s possible to rig larger mainsails (bigger roach and full or long battens), and much smaller genoas — for similar or improved performance and much easier handling. I’m not sure that roller-reefing is really useful, at least on the smaller/lighter boats, if you get rid of the large, overlapping genoa in the first place.
Great website btw. I’ll need a new mast and am going through the articles on the topic…
Best,
Martin