Select to expand quote

Shaggybaxter said..
Ramona, out of interest , on your boat is your third reef in the main equivalent to a trysail? Or do you find you still benefit from a trysail still?

Probably larger than a trysail. I don't have the boats original trysail she would have had to carry for SH races. I'm fairly sure the previous owners handled the extreme SH races with just the fully reefed main and storm jib. There is a lot of work to switch from a fully reefed main to trysail if you don't have a separate dedicated track for the trysail.

Cruising, we are talking about!
I am partial to the well tried old ways. Most of the people are talking about genoas as there would be no other headsails available. The esteemed members seem to have forgotten the high clewed cruising sail, the yankee. In conjunction with the stay sail this sail, furled or hanked, gives the size about a 110-120% genoa, but it is more versatile and safe to handle. Just get rid of it, furl it, and you are ready for the blow after reefing the main.

Similarly forgotten, are the twin headsails of the past. They are similar size to a 110% genoa and make downwind sailing a joy, no danger of accidental gibing as one drops the main when the twins are used. And they do not necessarily need a double fore stay either. They need twin foils on a furling set up, thou. The other advantage of twins is one can forget about spinnakers which could be notoriously difficult to handle single handed or short handed.

Another favourite of mine are the S/S Wichard hanks instead of the corroding, hard to open brass piston hanks.
Have not seen many of them in Australia despite their ease of handling. One can bend or unbend sails with Wichard hanks much faster.

+1 for Wichard hanks.
+1 about the rig checked for suitability for an inner forestay.

Sigh...just had word today's around the bay race has been cancelled due to a high winds forecast of....ahem......25 knots. Are we becoming a bit soft? Do we really consider 25knots too extreme a condition?

This is why this thread is interesting. How to improve , whether it be for speed and/or comfort, in heavy air sailing is always interesting , to me anyways!

MB, well reasoned and a good argument for no inner. If I may say so that's a great piece of writing and you raise very valid points.

A question to MB about that 10%, cutter stay vs fore stay. Is the length of the mast calculated from the deck or in case of a keel stepped one from the keel? I could not find any reference to this on web sites.

And to Shaggy; did you get my pm?

Select to expand quote

Shaggybaxter said..
+1 for Wichard hanks.
+1 about the rig checked for suitability for an inner forestay.

Sigh...just had word today's around the bay race has been cancelled due to a high winds forecast of....ahem......25 knots. Are we becoming a bit soft? Do we really consider 25knots too extreme a condition?

This is why this thread is interesting. How to improve , whether it be for speed and/or comfort, in heavy air sailing is always interesting , to me anyways!

MB, well reasoned and a good argument for no inner. If I may say so that's a great piece of writing and you raise very valid points.

I'm really new to sailing I guess hAving only been doing it for 5 years but I've been doing it a lot since i started. On my last boat- a 22 for bluebird I took on some strong winds. Through racing every saturday I learmed that you took everything in your stride and reduced sail area When you needed to, although our skipper doesn't like to unless really necassary. every race I learned something new and I'm actually looking forward to it starting up again for This reason. Once I got confident I started taking the bluebird out in 25 to 30 knots with a triple main reef an tiny storm jib. I'd go out on the harbour and there'd be no other sail boats at all. it was all because I asked the skipper/owner of our race team "what do you do when the winds keep getting stronger and stronger" and he said " you reduce sail area" it was so bloody obvious and like I'd unlocked a secret. Now I had my boat going as if it was in no wind at all. Totally under control & not over powered. It took only a $3 conversion to a go on the mast to be able to reef whilst underway, solo. I guess it's a smaller boat with smaller sail area. The bigger the boat the harder it would be.

Select to expand quote

Sectorsteve said...
now that I'm going down the road of getting a reefer furler, I'm also thinking it might be nice to have the option of a hanked sail As well. I've been racking my brain and thought of this scenario as an option. Basically an inner forestay that connects about 2 thirds up the mast and is stowed when not in use, ie shackled at the bottom of the mast To keep it out of the way on the foredeck. Limited room up there anyway on a Tophat. I'm also thinking of a self tacking system for this to limit sheets, and not have to have more cars.
Am i dreaming or is this a possibility? I think if it was set up right it would work really well potential maybe to be a great set up.

This is mine. I normally have it tied back but put it in place before going through the latest bad weather. Haven't put up the storm jib yet..the problem with this is as someone else said, you have to furl in the jib to tack. I also have a D shackle at the top of the furker holding it to the storm forestay which is stopping furler from twisting.
Thanks for asking the question.

You got 2 fore stays right next to each other? Why?

Select to expand quote

sirgallivant said..
A question to MB about that 10%, cutter stay vs fore stay. Is the length of the mast calculated from the deck or in case of a keel stepped one from the keel? I could not find any reference to this on web sites.

And to Shaggy; did you get my pm?

I don't know sirg. Mine is deck stepped so I must admit I didn't really look at this matter. Thinking about it I would measure it from the deck as that is where the triangle of support from the stays and shrouds goes. That would also be a worst case situation so you are unlikely to get into trouble.
Where mine attaches I have not experienced any fouling of the heady and stay sail so 60-75cm down is an adequate clearance. That would make it a lot less than 10% on anything with a mast over 6-7.5 metres tall. Well short of anything the readers here have.
Mine is a Solent rig setup, the stays are not parallel, the inner stay is a steeper angle than the outer.

Select to expand quote

MorningBird said..

sirgallivant said..
A question to MB about that 10%, cutter stay vs fore stay. Is the length of the mast calculated from the deck or in case of a keel stepped one from the keel? I could not find any reference to this on web sites.

And to Shaggy; did you get my pm?

I don't know sirg. Mine is deck stepped so I must admit I didn't really look at this matter. Thinking about it I would measure it from the deck as that is where the triangle of support from the stays and shrouds goes. That would also be a worst case situation so you are unlikely to get into trouble.
Where mine attaches I have not experienced any fouling of the heady and stay sail so 60-75cm down is an adequate clearance. That would make it a lot less than 10% on anything with a mast over 6-7.5 metres tall. Well short of anything the readers here have.
Mine is a Solent rig setup, the stays are not parallel, the inner stay is a steeper angle than the outer.

I believe that should be 10% of the unsupported panel - about 4.5 meters on a 10 meter single spreader mast. But it truly depends on the mast sections ability to resist bending moment.

Select to expand quote

PhoenixStar said..

MorningBird said..

sirgallivant said..
A question to MB about that 10%, cutter stay vs fore stay. Is the length of the mast calculated from the deck or in case of a keel stepped one from the keel? I could not find any reference to this on web sites.

And to Shaggy; did you get my pm?

I don't know sirg. Mine is deck stepped so I must admit I didn't really look at this matter. Thinking about it I would measure it from the deck as that is where the triangle of support from the stays and shrouds goes. That would also be a worst case situation so you are unlikely to get into trouble.
Where mine attaches I have not experienced any fouling of the heady and stay sail so 60-75cm down is an adequate clearance. That would make it a lot less than 10% on anything with a mast over 6-7.5 metres tall. Well short of anything the readers here have.
Mine is a Solent rig setup, the stays are not parallel, the inner stay is a steeper angle than the outer.

I believe that should be 10% of the unsupported panel - about 4.5 meters on a 10 meter single spreader mast. But it truly depends on the mast sections ability to resist bending moment.

My apologies, I'm not sure what you mean by "10% of the unsupported panel - about 4.5 metres on a 10 metre single spreader mast".

450mm

Its probably worth pointing out that inner stays are often fitted just oppose leech and main sheet tension on a deeply reefed main. Positioning of the attachment point on the mast is often determined by the reefed main and flying a sail off this stay may only be a secondary bonus function So just like runners or checkstays stabilize the mast, a inner stay does the same. Inner stays often need some investigation if you are thinking of adding another reef to your main sail. If that becomes the case and you need an inner stay,,, awesome ,,, bonus

Select to expand quote

MorningBird said..

PhoenixStar said..

MorningBird said..

sirgallivant said..
A question to MB about that 10%, cutter stay vs fore stay. Is the length of the mast calculated from the deck or in case of a keel stepped one from the keel? I could not find any reference to this on web sites.

And to Shaggy; did you get my pm?

I don't know sirg. Mine is deck stepped so I must admit I didn't really look at this matter. Thinking about it I would measure it from the deck as that is where the triangle of support from the stays and shrouds goes. That would also be a worst case situation so you are unlikely to get into trouble.
Where mine attaches I have not experienced any fouling of the heady and stay sail so 60-75cm down is an adequate clearance. That would make it a lot less than 10% on anything with a mast over 6-7.5 metres tall. Well short of anything the readers here have.
Mine is a Solent rig setup, the stays are not parallel, the inner stay is a steeper angle than the outer.

I believe that should be 10% of the unsupported panel - about 4.5 meters on a 10 meter single spreader mast. But it truly depends on the mast sections ability to resist bending moment.

My apologies, I'm not sure what you mean by "10% of the unsupported panel - about 4.5 metres on a 10 metre single spreader mast".

I am as old as Methuselah and it is so long since I played with engineering that I admit that I an a dinosaur, but the works of Euler and Rankin still hold good, I believe. But it is admitted that all that theory gives inexact results for thin walled sections - masts. But it is a starting point. The thin walls of masts buckle under load when they are pushed out of longitudinal alignment. You have to limit the deflection with spreaders and stays. The stiffer the mast the greater the resistance to deflection and the fewer the spreaders that are needed to limit the span between support points. When you introduce bending you increase the deflection and increase the chance of buckling. Bending forces are introduced by things like mast cranes for back stays and spinnaker blocks, by diamonds not in line with spreaders, by masts flexing with the roll of the ship, by boom thrust from a vang, by spinnaker pole topping lifts. If you rig an inner stay to the mast at some place between the spreaders without a runner to back it up you risk introducing too much deflection. Your rigger says you can attach an inner fore-stay 10% from a fixed point and I would respect that - if the mast section is stiff enough and/or the stay not over-tensioned.

Sorry if that all sounds like smart assed waffle.

Select to expand quote

McNaughtical said..

Sectorsteve said...
now that I'm going down the road of getting a reefer furler, I'm also thinking it might be nice to have the option of a hanked sail As well. I've been racking my brain and thought of this scenario as an option. Basically an inner forestay that connects about 2 thirds up the mast and is stowed when not in use, ie shackled at the bottom of the mast To keep it out of the way on the foredeck. Limited room up there anyway on a Tophat. I'm also thinking of a self tacking system for this to limit sheets, and not have to have more cars.
Am i dreaming or is this a possibility? I think if it was set up right it would work really well potential maybe to be a great set up.

This is mine. I normally have it tied back but put it in place before going through the latest bad weather. Haven't put up the storm jib yet..the problem with this is as someone else said, you have to furl in the jib to tack. I also have a D shackle at the top of the furker holding it to the storm forestay which is stopping furler from twisting.
Thanks for asking the question.

Not only do you have to furl every time to tack but the sheets have to be twice as long as normal! That must seriously reduce the amount of tacking in confined waters type sailing.

Select to expand quote

PhoenixStar said..

MorningBird said..

PhoenixStar said..

MorningBird said..

sirgallivant said..
A question to MB about that 10%, cutter stay vs fore stay. Is the length of the mast calculated from the deck or in case of a keel stepped one from the keel? I could not find any reference to this on web sites.

And to Shaggy; did you get my pm?

I don't know sirg. Mine is deck stepped so I must admit I didn't really look at this matter. Thinking about it I would measure it from the deck as that is where the triangle of support from the stays and shrouds goes. That would also be a worst case situation so you are unlikely to get into trouble.
Where mine attaches I have not experienced any fouling of the heady and stay sail so 60-75cm down is an adequate clearance. That would make it a lot less than 10% on anything with a mast over 6-7.5 metres tall. Well short of anything the readers here have.
Mine is a Solent rig setup, the stays are not parallel, the inner stay is a steeper angle than the outer.

I believe that should be 10% of the unsupported panel - about 4.5 meters on a 10 meter single spreader mast. But it truly depends on the mast sections ability to resist bending moment.

My apologies, I'm not sure what you mean by "10% of the unsupported panel - about 4.5 metres on a 10 metre single spreader mast".

I am as old as Methuselah and it is so long since I played with engineering that I admit that I an a dinosaur, but the works of Euler and Rankin still hold good, I believe. But it is admitted that all that theory gives inexact results for thin walled sections - masts. But it is a starting point. The thin walls of masts buckle under load when they are pushed out of longitudinal alignment. You have to limit the deflection with spreaders and stays. The stiffer the mast the greater the resistance to deflection and the fewer the spreaders that are needed to limit the span between support points. When you introduce bending you increase the deflection and increase the chance of buckling. Bending forces are introduced by things like mast cranes for back stays and spinnaker blocks, by diamonds not in line with spreaders, by masts flexing with the roll of the ship, by boom thrust from a vang, by spinnaker pole topping lifts. If you rig an inner stay to the mast at some place between the spreaders without a runner to back it up you risk introducing too much deflection. Your rigger says you can attach an inner fore-stay 10% from a fixed point and I would respect that - if the mast section is stiff enough and/or the stay not over-tensioned.

Sorry if that all sounds like smart assed waffle.

Not smart assed waffle Phoenix, just sound, objective, engineering - nothing in the physical world should be done without it.
regards,
allan

Select to expand quote

Ramona said..

McNaughtical said..

Sectorsteve said...
now that I'm going down the road of getting a reefer furler, I'm also thinking it might be nice to have the option of a hanked sail As well. I've been racking my brain and thought of this scenario as an option. Basically an inner forestay that connects about 2 thirds up the mast and is stowed when not in use, ie shackled at the bottom of the mast To keep it out of the way on the foredeck. Limited room up there anyway on a Tophat. I'm also thinking of a self tacking system for this to limit sheets, and not have to have more cars.
Am i dreaming or is this a possibility? I think if it was set up right it would work really well potential maybe to be a great set up.

This is mine. I normally have it tied back but put it in place before going through the latest bad weather. Haven't put up the storm jib yet..the problem with this is as someone else said, you have to furl in the jib to tack. I also have a D shackle at the top of the furker holding it to the storm forestay which is stopping furler from twisting.
Thanks for asking the question.

Not only do you have to furl every time to tack but the sheets have to be twice as long as normal! That must seriously reduce the amount of tacking in confined waters type sailing.

Yes true Ramona. I have not yet sailed with it attached as shown. When I bought the boat it was tied back somewhere and I didn't know what it was for a long time. It was also showing signs of wear. I have since finding out what it is, replaced it, but have never used it to sail. It is too close to the furler the furl the jib easily anyway, and I'd worry about it damaging the jib. I can see it as useful in bad weather though if you were prepared ahead and hanked on the storm jib and didn't worry about using the furler at all . It just seems like extra strength in bad weather. Sorry for hijacking your thread Sector Steve, but it's been a question in my mind too, what to do with it and when. I certainly wouldn't want to be out the front trying to attach it to the deck when the weather was already bad.

Select to expand quote

Ramona said...

McNaughtical said..

Sectorsteve said...
now that I'm going down the road of getting a reefer furler, I'm also thinking it might be nice to have the option of a hanked sail As well. I've been racking my brain and thought of this scenario as an option. Basically an inner forestay that connects about 2 thirds up the mast and is stowed when not in use, ie shackled at the bottom of the mast To keep it out of the way on the foredeck. Limited room up there anyway on a Tophat. I'm also thinking of a self tacking system for this to limit sheets, and not have to have more cars.
Am i dreaming or is this a possibility? I think if it was set up right it would work really well potential maybe to be a great set up.

This is mine. I normally have it tied back but put it in place before going through the latest bad weather. Haven't put up the storm jib yet..the problem with this is as someone else said, you have to furl in the jib to tack. I also have a D shackle at the top of the furker holding it to the storm forestay which is stopping furler from twisting.
Thanks for asking the question.

Not only do you have to furl every time to tack but the sheets have to be twice as long as normal! That must seriously reduce the amount of tacking in confined waters type sailing.

As always Ramona you hit a key issue, longer sheets going around the inner stay. S&S34s have a mast support baby stay so the inner stay is only another metre or so forard.
The inner stay is only ever rigged on multi day passages when tacks are measured in times of the day. The morning tack or the afternoon tack

We are on dangerous grounds here, and this has to be clarified.

A baby stay is not a load bearing structure, it is there to support the mast, not to carry a sail of any sort. It is very close to the mast, about one quarter of the J measurement and it is a permanent fixture. It could run in any angle to the fore stay.

The stay sail or cutter sail is carried by a purpose buit stay with load bearing considerations. Hence the running back stays to counter it's loads. It must be in accordance with the rest of the rig's load bearing requirements. It is usually attached to the fore deck at half or forward of the J measurement. It usually runs parallel to the fore stay.

The double or twin fore stay, which is used for twin head sails instead of a spinnaker down wind, with the main sail lovered, could be like on Selkies picture fore and aft or athwartship.

The rig on the picture is very old school and l am not sure, it was bult like as it is now. I guess, it was a double fore stay later modified for a furler or a fore stay was added to the rig for some reason. It is a bit unusual. One would not be surprised if it would damage the sail on the furler.

The rig with a load bearing inner stay is not a sloop. It is a cutter. The sloop or bermudan rig was designed to carry a genoa while the cutter rigs were designed for a high clewed yankee, to clear the inner fore stay without removing or furling the fore sail. The genoa and the cutter sail is certainly an arrangement which is seldom used in conjunction. Certainly not to be used on narrow waterways, thus, makings tacking rather difficult.

In the modern world yankees are rear as hen's teeth. It is a typical cruising arrangement seldom used today.
If one is familiar with the old cruising bible of Eric C Hiscock's 'Voyaging under sail' one should see the difference. Bernard Moitessier's books are also a very good source for this kind of information.

A twin head sail:




A cutter rig:

The twins explained:

I recently put a mast head furler on my RL28. I have since found that it is fantastic in 15knts or less but after that the boat is a bit overpowered. My solution was to reinstall the old forestay which is 3/4 rig with the bottom about a foot back from the furler. The stay is attached with a 3-1tackle with a jammer and snap shackle. When not in use the stay is run down the outer side stay and clipped with a bungy cord to the hand rails on the cabin top.The tackle stays attached in the anchor well when not in use and I just use the snap shackle to hook onto the stay.
I read the forecast and make the decision which way to rig before I go out, I use the same sheets for both rigs to lessen the conjestion.
So now I have a dirty great big genoa for lightish airs and a no1+2 for anything heavier. Works a treat

Select to expand quote

lloydyboy53 said..
I recently put a mast head furler on my RL28. I have since found that it is fantastic in 15knts or less but after that the boat is a bit overpowered. My solution was to reinstall the old forestay which is 3/4 rig with the bottom about a foot back from the furler. The stay is attached with a 3-1tackle with a jammer and snap shackle. When not in use the stay is run down the outer side stay and clipped with a bungy cord to the hand rails on the cabin top.The tackle stays attached in the anchor well when not in use and I just use the snap shackle to hook onto the stay.
I read the forecast and make the decision which way to rig before I go out, I use the same sheets for both rigs to lessen the conjestion.
So now I have a dirty great big genoa for lightish airs and a no1+2 for anything heavier. Works a treat

Are you not able to reef the furled sail in above 15 knots?

Select to expand quote

sirgallivant said...
We are on dangerous grounds here, and this has to be clarified.

A baby stay is not a load bearing structure, it is there to support the mast, not to carry a sail of any sort. It is very close to the mast, about one quarter of the J measurement and it is a permanent fixture. It could run in any angle to the fore stay.

The stay sail or cutter sail is carried by a purpose buit stay with load bearing considerations. Hence the running back stays to counter it's loads. It must be in accordance with the rest of the rig's load bearing requirements. It is usually attached to the fore deck at half or forward of the J measurement. It usually runs parallel to the fore stay.

The double or twin fore stay, which is used for twin head sails instead of a spinnaker down wind, with the main sail lovered, could be like on Selkies picture fore and aft or athwartship.

The rig on the picture is very old school and l am not sure, it was bult like as it is now. I guess, it was a double fore stay later modified for a furler or a fore stay was added to the rig for some reason. It is a bit unusual. One would not be surprised if it would damage the sail on the furler.

The rig with a load bearing inner stay is not a sloop. It is a cutter. The sloop or bermudan rig was designed to carry a genoa while the cutter rigs were designed for a high clewed yankee, to clear the inner fore stay without removing or furling the fore sail. The genoa and the cutter sail is certainly an arrangement which is seldom used in conjunction. Certainly not to be used on narrow waterways, thus, makings tacking rather difficult.

In the modern world yankees are rear as hen's teeth. It is a typical cruising arrangement seldom used today.
If one is familiar with the old cruising bible of Eric C Hiscock's 'Voyaging under sail' one should see the difference. Bernard Moitessier's books are also a very good source for this kind of information.

A twin head sail:




A cutter rig:

The twins explained:

Dead right sirg. I have heard of S&S34 owners who try to rig a sail on the baby stay. This is very bad form. The baby stay stops the mast from pumping and isn't stressed for the load of a sail.
When MB has the inner forestay rigged she is technically a cutter I suppose. But because it isn't really a cutter as the stay sail doesn't work as a stay sail I call it a slutter rig. A sloop/cutter cross.
It is only really useful to carry the storm jib with the headsail furled.

Steve.
I can furl the heady but as I only have one reef point in the main and the boat was designed as a three quarter rig she is more balanced if I revert to the original set-up when the going gets interesting.
The genoa is a cruising sail and when I furl it the foot gets higher off the deck which seems to throw the boat off balance.
I sailed her with the no2 and a reef in the main the other day and the wind was gusting a tad over 30knts we averaged around 9knts,ended up coming in only about 15 mins behind my mates Elan37 which flies even when there is no wind at all. LOL

Select to expand quote

lloydyboy53 said..
Steve.
I can furl the heady but as I only have one reef point in the main and the boat was designed as a three quarter rig she is more balanced if I revert to the original set-up when the going gets interesting.
The genoa is a cruising sail and when I furl it the foot gets higher off the deck which seems to throw the boat off balance.
I sailed her with the no2 and a reef in the main the other day and the wind was gusting a tad over 30knts we averaged around 9knts,ended up coming in only about 15 mins behind my mates Elan37 which flies even when there is no wind at all. LOL

I understand. why don't these reef/furlers keep the foot low as this would be where you'd want the sail right? a question for everyone: do all reefer furlers leave you with a tiny triangle half way up the stay when you've reefer hard?

Select to expand quote

Sectorsteve said..

lloydyboy53 said..
Steve.
I can furl the heady but as I only have one reef point in the main and the boat was designed as a three quarter rig she is more balanced if I revert to the original set-up when the going gets interesting.
The genoa is a cruising sail and when I furl it the foot gets higher off the deck which seems to throw the boat off balance.
I sailed her with the no2 and a reef in the main the other day and the wind was gusting a tad over 30knts we averaged around 9knts,ended up coming in only about 15 mins behind my mates Elan37 which flies even when there is no wind at all. LOL

I understand. why don't these reef/furlers keep the foot low as this would be where you'd want the sail right? a question for everyone: do all reefer furlers leave you with a tiny triangle half way up the stay when you've reefer hard?

It's physics, or maths, or maths and physics. It's a triangle. You can do a little bit like tack swivels etc, but in the end, unless you can engineer a system that drops the head down and back, you are limited by physics, or maths or maths and physics.

Select to expand quote

FreeRadical said..

Sectorsteve said..

lloydyboy53 said..
Steve.
I can furl the heady but as I only have one reef point in the main and the boat was designed as a three quarter rig she is more balanced if I revert to the original set-up when the going gets interesting.
The genoa is a cruising sail and when I furl it the foot gets higher off the deck which seems to throw the boat off balance.
I sailed her with the no2 and a reef in the main the other day and the wind was gusting a tad over 30knts we averaged around 9knts,ended up coming in only about 15 mins behind my mates Elan37 which flies even when there is no wind at all. LOL

I understand. why don't these reef/furlers keep the foot low as this would be where you'd want the sail right? a question for everyone: do all reefer furlers leave you with a tiny triangle half way up the stay when you've reefer hard?

It's physics, or maths, or maths and physics. It's a triangle. You can do a little bit like tack swivels etc, but in the end, unless you can engineer a system that drops the head down and back, you are limited by physics, or maths or maths and physics.

good point. sounds like theyre not ideal as small sails when reefed then.

I gave up!

If the sail is cut as a furling sail then the clew gets higher off the deck as the sail is furled. The deck track sheeting position is not altered as you reef even if you have only a couple of feet of sail out.

Select to expand quote

MorningBird said..

Dead right sirg. I have heard of S&S34 owners who try to rig a sail on the baby stay. This is very bad form. The baby stay stops the mast from pumping and isn't stressed for the load of a sail.
When MB has the inner forestay rigged she is technically a cutter I suppose. But because it isn't really a cutter as the stay sail doesn't work as a stay sail I call it a slutter rig. A sloop/cutter cross.
It is only really useful to carry the storm jib with the headsail furled.

I call it a marconi or mast head sloop rig with a "Solent Stay".

I think if you are going to have a roller furling head sail or genoa, a Solent Stay is a must have as long as it is made detachable from the deck for lighter air sailing. Also I think the Solent Stay should be used for smaller sails than the furling genoa such as a No. 2/3 and a working jib or blade sail (long luff with small draught).

It would seem to give the best of both worlds on a sloop and allows for sails to cope with most wind strengths. With a good Solent Stay set up I think a "blade" sail would be far more effective than a storm jib.

Most fin keel sloops will sail very well with just a narrow working jib or blade type sail in 30 to 40 knots of wind. Anything above that I would be thinking bare pole and laying ahull if there is sea room.

Wow
love this new technology:i must learn to make soft shackles and splice dyne a etc
does this this setup function like an adjustable Genoa car?
thanks for sharing all this great stuff,Shaggy

Sorry guys a whole lot of people here are missing the point, it is not about reducing sail area it is all about changing the centre of effort.
That is the point of an inner forestay to which a small headsail is attached.
The centre of effort moves further back over the centre of lateral resistance
Boat get easier to steer and you don't slam as much.
It also depends on the boat as well.
You must balance the boat.
As the strength issue the shock loading on a baby stay is far beyond the load of the sail.
If it is not strong enough for a sail it sure isn't strong enough for the shock loading of a bad landing.