Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 708 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Timber for mast step #24973
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    I have no doubt that other early GP14 afficionados will weigh in constructively here,  but broadly I concur.

    “Mahogany” was the original,  but that is a broad term,   covering around 400 different mahogany variants if my recollections of O Level Woodwork of 65 years ago are correct.     In this case that was likely to be of a species that is now difficult to obtain.

    The Robbins website,  in their marine timbers section,  will give you objective information on the various different marine woods available.    Without looking it up,  I would think that such oily woods as teak might also be worth considering.

    The mast step conversion itself suggests combining with weight reduction by removing the inner slat from each of the side benches,  and using that timber;   but personally I would not wish to do that for reasons of seating comfort.

    Whatever timber you use,  it would be worth encapsulating in epoxy.   I have very recently started using Smith’s CPES,  and am pleased with it thus far,  but my personal experience is too recent to form a long-term view.   https://www.makewoodgood.co.uk/product/cpes-clear-penetrating-epoxy-sealer/?gclid=Cj0KCQjwwtWgBhDhARIsAEMcxeAF6UBaNMsCRD7sbb7URRsEKkKZ4a1vwE-yd_O6UrOYtPWraSKBefoaAkR_EALw_wcB

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Can you Help Us… #24882
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Since this post has now been filled – and many thanks to Adeel for stepping forward and volunteering – I am “unsticking” this topic.

    Oliver

    in reply to: Is the GP14 Class in decline #24790
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    >   I think  a big problem for Gp sailors is getting a crew. 

    You are probably right there,  and I say that not only because that mirrors my own experience.   I have the impression that after the Covid pandemic the single-handed classes recovered much better than the two-handed classes,  and it has been suggested that this may be partly due to people’s fear of picking up infection from their partner in the boat.

    But sailing is fundamentally an open-air activity,  for goodness sake!  …   …

     

    >  If sail plan an controls could be made easier for single handed sailing   …   …   it may make a difference

    I don’t think there is anything fundamental in the sail plan and controls that mitigates against single-handed sailing,  except issues in connection with setting the spinnaker.

    Main and headsail are perfectly manageable single-handed,  although you will of course have less weight than when fully crewed,  so you may need to fit a decent reefing system,  and reef earlier than you would when fully crewed.   But that can still be wholly within the class rules.

    Incidentally early in the life of the Association there is  a Minute to the effect that no Measurer shall pass deliberately under-sized sails,  and a clear statement that this is to prevent the use of under-sized sails instead of reefing.  So very clearly at that stage in the development of the Class one was specifically expected to reef when necessary,  even when racing!

    There are several ways of handling the genoa sheets when single-handing.   Some owners like continuous sheets,  or tie the two ends of conventional sheets together,  so that the working sheet is always accessible from the weather side of the boat.   This is particularly important after a tack or a gybe,  when you do not want to find that the new working sheet is down in the lee bilge when you need to be sitting out.

    Personally I don’t like continuous sheets,  but I do prepare my tacks (and gybes)  by throwing the sheet that is shortly to become the working one across the boat in advance of the turn;  so it is immediately to hand when needed.

    Setting the spinnaker when single-handed is  –  for me  –  something I am prepared to do only in light winds,  because I don’t want to end up out of control and ending up with a capsize.   But that is the caution born of age and experience.

    Incidentally the physical process of setting and handing the spinnaker when single-handed is greatly helped by using a tiller brake,  so that while you are dealing with the sail the tiller can be mechanically held in position.  A simple length of shockcord stretched taut across the boat,  and then looped over the tiller when required,  is sufficient on my boat.

     

    If  …   …racing and open meetings accommodate single hand sailing it may make a difference

    I fully agree that there may be some mileage in that.   So far as I am aware there is no reason within either Class Rules or Racing Rules why some specifically single-handed races cannot be programmed,  either as part of other open meetings or as separate events in their own right.    I am not sure what the issues would be in terms of the Rules if one wished enter single-handed in a race intended for fully-crewed boats,  but I think it unlikely that one would wish to do so;   I would expect that in anything other than ghosting conditions a single-hander would be at something of a competitive disadvantage against fully-crewed boats.

    But specific single-handed races are an excellent idea.

    My own club is no longer a dinghy racing club,  or even a dinghy club;   we now do other things.   But that is how we started life,  and in the early days we had a number of single-handed races and even single-handed trophies,  specifically for single-handing in boats that were designed as two-man boats.

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Is the GP14 Class in decline #24788
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Finally,  “2 How to rejuvenate it.”

    Your Committee has been very active over the entire lifetime of the Class  –  and particularly over the last twenty years  –  in progressive development (i.e. rejuvenation) of the boat,  while also being careful to maintain a level playing field for the racers.

    Thus in regard to the hull we have seen the introduction of GRP boats (in 1969),  followed by FRP boats,  underfloor buoyancy,  the Series 2 hull (in all its successive developmental stages),  epoxy boats,  several changes to reserve buoyancy arrangements to reduce the risk of inversion,  several changes to cockpit design and deck layout (e.g. spinnaker holes,  curved fore end of the cockpit,  curvature of the thwart,  profile of the stern deck,  etc.,  etc.)   This has culminated in the current new developments of the latest composite boats,  and the all-new “All-rounder”,  as well as the continued and well-deserved popularity of the wooden boats  –  which themselves have included some of the above recent developments.

    In regard to the rig and the sailplan we have again seen progressive development over almost the entire lifetime of the Class.   Developments over the lifetime of the class have included introduction of spinnakers (which was hugely controversial at first),  synthetic sails,  genoas,  increased roach to the mainsail,  metal spars,  massively increased rig tension,  very powerful kickers,  bendy spars,  and laminate sails.

    If you have specific suggestions for further development please offer them to the Committee.

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Is the GP14 Class in decline #24787
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Now to your specific proposals:

    “Change the design” equates to “make it something other than a GP14”.    Fine,  if you want to sail a different boat;   there are many there to choose from,  but it won’t then be a GP14.

    its way too heavy”.   With respect,  I disagree,  strongly.   One of the reasons the boat is such a good sea boat is that,  as well as having good lines,  she is heavy enough to carry her way through waves,  and (within reason) to stand up to her canvas.   (And,  yes,  I know you can reef if necessary;   I wrote the definitive paper on the topic!)    Many years ago our Hon. Secretary told me of the occasion when he had met Jack Holt at a Boat Show,  and asked him what he had done in designing the GP14 to make her such a superb sea boat.  He got a one word answer;   “Displacement”.   That is a very fair assessment.

    It is important to realise that the GP14 was intended from outset to be a genuinely general purpose boat,  equally suitable for cruising,  pottering,  fishing,  and for rowing or using under outboard.  Interestingly,  racing was never part of the initial design brief,  although the boat quickly showed her potential for racing,  and became immensely popular for that activity,  at the very highest level.   We are justly proud of having ex-Olympians amongst our owners (one of whom,  a personal friend,  is now exclusively a serious dinghy cruiser …),  and we have very occasionally had current Olympians;   but the Class has never lost sight of the fact that probably the majority of GP14 owners use our boats for purposes other than racing.

    Alright,  some elderly and overweight GP14s are indeed too heavy,  but one that is at or near the minimum specified weight is not.

     

    “make it easy to sail single handed”   It already is.   In the last twenty-plus years the majority of my sailing has been single-handed,  and if I can still manage one single-handed at age 80  –  and I can and do  –  I don’t see what problem you are referring to.   What would you wish to change?   You could of course get rid of the spinnaker,  but for many people that is one of the great attractions of the class,  and you personally have no need to use one if you don’t want to.   (And in lighter winds even in my seventies I used to regularly fly my spinnaker even when single-handed.)

    You could replace the symmetrical spinnaker with an asymmetric one;    but the boat would then be nothing like so good downwind,  and much less technical (and thus less interesting and exciting) for keen racers to sail.   Oh,  and it would take her out of class.

    Or you could use a smaller headsail than the genoa.   Try the standard jib,  which is still a part of the official rig.   Or,  my own preferred solution,  fit out your boat with a modern sophisticated reefing system.

    Or you could sail without a headsail at all.   Nothing to stop you doing so,  although the boat won’t sail particularly well,  especially to windward.

    Or you could completely re-rig the boat;  but then she would no longer be a GP14.

    That apart,  what else would you wish to change?

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Is the GP14 Class in decline #24785
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    I share your concern,  but the picture is not quite as black as you paint.

    Almost all dinghy classes are in decline,  for a variety of reasons,  some of them actually very desirable.  Sixty or seventy years ago,  if one wanted to own a new (or reasonably new) boat the only option for most people was either simply a rowing boat or a canoe or a sailing dinghy.   Yachts and large powerboats were prohibitively expensive,  and such vessels as windsurfers,  kitesurfers,  foiling craft,  RIBs,  jetskis,  and small but fast powerboats had yet to be invented (with the exception in the latter case of racing hydroplanes).   The sailing dinghy was the affordable option.

    And GRP had yet to become available to the normal retail market.

    Today one can buy a very serviceable elderly yacht for less than the purchase price of a good dinghy (alright,  she will cost more to run,  but the initial outlay can be very modest indeed).   And many people,  despite the immediate cost of living crisis,  have far more disposable income than they had in my youth.   So those who want to get afloat have vastly more choice than they had in my youth.   All that is highly desirable.

    A further factor is that dinghy sailing has greatly declined all round the coast,  but that alongside that decline I also see far more yachts,  and powerboats,  and recreational fishing boats,  and jetskis,  and windsurfers,  than I used to see even just fifty years ago.   That represents greater affluence,  and greater choice,  all of which is again desirable.   I have the impression that inland clubs are holding on very much better than coastal clubs,  perhaps because their waters are less attractive to owners of these other types of vessel.

    Another factor is that many people are “cash rich but time poor”,  and want to be able to get into a boat that they think they can “drive” as though it was a car,  rather than wanting to invest the time into learning the necessary skills for sailing.   That is not desirable,  but (for some people) it is a fact of life.

    My understanding is that the GP14 class is actually holding on far better than many of our competitors,  but I recognise that we nonetheless do have a problem.

    That is enough for one reply;   I will address your specific suggestions separately.

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Mantus DInghy Anchor #24763
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Many thanks to all who have responded,  across several forums.

    A member of one of the other forums sent me a link to a most impressive video of a practical test on the Mantus Dinghy Anchor:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9Zh-MrmwaA 

    That apart,  my enquiry was very specific to this one particular anchor,  not about anchors or anchoring technique more generally.   Many correspondents on other forums offered other observations about anchoring more generally,  much of it valid but not what was actually asked;   however that may well have all been very relevant and interesting so some of our wider readers,  so I thank them for broadening the topic.

    The context is that many years ago I developed a PowerPoint Presentation on anchor types for a Seamanship Course that I was running at the time,  and more recently I updated that for the Advanced Cruiser Training Course that I developed for this Class Association;   and I have sent that to the new GP14 owner whom I am currently advising.   Most of the mainstream anchors are covered in that presentation,  but at the time of writing the Mantus Dinghy Anchor had only just appeared on the scene;   so I was now asking for people’s experience of actually using it.



    Oliver

    in reply to: Sail Number history – boat history #24737
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Details of the boat builder and name (if any) should be in the records held by the Association.   An enquiry to the Archivist,  via the Office,  should elicit a digitised copy of all the information we have on the boat.

    I am not clear what technical detail you want,  but between us we can answer most queries.

    Hope this helps,

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Righting lines #24526
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    I have mast head buoyancy so won’t be inverting

    That depends on how much masthead buoyancy.    The popular 9-litre float (which is the size that I choose) is not sufficient to prevent inversion;   its purpose is to delay the process,  thus buying time,  during which a competent helmsman can take the necessary action to right the boat.   The 40-litre size intended for training establishments,  which many private owners feel is unacceptably cumbersome,  may (or possibly may not) be sufficient to actually prevent inversion.

     

    I climb from inside up over the gunwale and pick up the righting line on the way over.

    As I understand it,  the purpose of the righting line is primarily to assist in righting after inversion.   In a simple horizontal capsize,  if you are able to climb over the gunwale as the boat goes over you are unlikely to need a righting line.    When I was still a young man,  or possibly even a teenager,  my father told me that by the time the mast hits the water you should be already standing on the centreboard;  and on my very infrequent capsizes I have normally managed to do so,  right up to the last one,  in 2009,  at age 66.   However I am not sure that at age 80 next month I am still sufficiently agile to do that now;   like you,  I try very hard to ensure that the situation is not allowed to arise.

    However once capsized,  horizontally,  and with yourself standing on the centreboard,  a righting line would enable you to lean further out,  and so at that point it might make recovery easier.   But accessing a righting line while standing on the centreboard would be monumentally difficult,  and the jib/genoa sheet may be your best tool then.     I don’t see how you can possibly access either type of righting line while also climbing over the side of the boat as she capsizes;   the process of capsize is rapid,  and there just isn’t time to access the internal type;   and you need to be able to reach the transom to unclip the external type.

    So for a horizontal capsize,  I feel that the preferred method for any competent and normally agile helmsman  is the “dry capsize”;   as the boat goes over you step out over the side of the boat and onto the centreboard,  and then you step back in again as she comes upright,  without ever getting your body in the water.   Alright,  that may not be a fully dry capsize;  you may well get your feet wet.

    But if you are unable to do that,  for whatever reason (and that need not be confined to old age and relative stiffness  –  I had one instance in 2005,  17 years ago,  when I happened to be in the bottom of the boat putting the self-bailers down when the vicious gust hit,  and any attempt to then climb up over the side would have pulled the boat over on top of me,  so instead I deliberately dropped into the water),  once you are in the water and the boat is capsized horizontally righting lines may well be helpful in righting her.     But they will not normally then be essential.

    If however the boat should invert,  for whatever reason,  you now have an entirely different situation.   That is where the righting lines come into their own.

    Hope this helps,

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Righting lines #24520
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    I first met the concept of righting lines in summer of 2009,  when the GP14 cruising fleet was caught out in an unforecast force 7/8 off a major Anglesey headland,  and with overfalls.   The forecast had been a benign force 3.

    The one single-hander in the fleet capsized and inverted;   and then,  in conditions when I would have been struggling to cope with that situation,  and which I doubted was recoverable without outside assistance,  he righted the boat and resumed sailing.

    His two righting lines (one each side) were knotted every foot or so of their length,  and terminated in a turk’s head knot (giving a substantial ball at the end of the line).   As he described it afterwards,  he picked up the nearest righting line,  by reaching underneath the capsized hull,  then flicked the line over the hull,  and holding onto the end  –  it is important never to let go of it   –  he swam round to the far side of the boat.   Then he lay flat in the water,  with feet on the gunwale and legs braced,  and hauled in one knot at a time.   The boat simply has to come up.    And it did.

    Use a type and diameter of rope which you would consider for a mainsheet or jibsheet.

    Three seem to be two different concepts of righting lines.  His ones,  which I immediately replicated in my own boat (but,  thankfully,  have never had occasion to use),  were each secured to an internal strongpoint  –  in my case I used the forward seat knee  –  one each side of the boat,   and were then each stuffed into a polythene bag and stowed under the forward end of the side benches.   That should be reachable (under the inverted hull) in the event of an inversion.   One advantage of this system,  as compared with the following alternative,  is that the length is not critical.   It needs to be sufficient,  and it may be helpful if it is generous,  but provided the length is not unreasonable there is no absolute maximum length.   However accessing the line by reaching under the inverted hull may possibly be difficult in practice.

    The alternative,  which I have seen on a number of boats but have never seen in use,  is an external line,  one each side,  again strongly secured to the hull,  and led aft along the hull just below the gunwale,  from somewhere near the shrouds and round the transom to the opposite quarter.    If it ends with a length of shockcord this will keep it under tension,  and thus keep it in place,  and it can be simply hooked onto any suitable fitting (such as a lacing hook) at the far quarter;   the lines from either side will cross at the transom.    It may be helpful to have one or two other lacing hooks along the length of the line to keep it up close to the gunwale.   It seems to me,  without having actually tried this system,  that the crunch point is whether this permits sufficient length of line to flip over the inverted hull and also stretch out far enough to use the recovery method described above.     A second potential issue is pulling the line out from behind the rudder of the inverted boat.

    So you have a choice of two systems,  each with is limitations.

    Of course you could consider installing both systems,  they do not obstruct or interfere with each other.

    Essentially the righting lines,  in either case,  are doing what you would otherwise use the jibsheets to do.   But using righting lines rather than a jibsheet enables to you right the boat without at the same time sheeting in the jib tight (or,  worse,  the genoa);   and that may well be sufficient sail area to capsize you again immediately the boat is righted.

    Hope this helps;   and hope you never need to use either of them  –  but it is an important safety provision just in case!

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Rear main – ratchet block? #24466
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    I concur absolutely, with both trains of thought.

    Yes, most definitely,  to keeping transom sheeting,  if that is what you personally prefer.   It is also what feels most natural to myself.   But,  more importantly,  for almost everything  except racing it has immense advantages;   although I fully accept that a system which involves the helmsman facing forward for tacking and gybing,  with a sheeting system led to the centre,  perhaps has the edge in the very special (and perhaps artificial?) environment of racing.

    But for everything else,  transom sheeting works better.  It leaves more room in the boat when sailing with more than two persons aboard,  and does not obstruct you moving across the boat

    And crucially,  in a gybe manoeuvre in heavy following seas,  it allows to you to look where you need to be looking  –  dead astern  at those following seas  –  in order to choose your wave or your “smooth” for when you actually make the gybe.   Then,  the helmsman can grab the two parts of the sheet in one hand,  while holding the tiller with the other,  and at the chosen moment can whip the boom smartly across.   With true centre sheeting (rare in GP14s) that is simply not possible,  and with the ubiquitous split-tail mainsheet led to the centre there is far more “give” in the system when pulling from that point,  so it is inefficient in that particular manoeuvre.  And of course the crew should not be looking aft,  so cannot perform the gybe at the optimum moment;  and anyway you have no crew when you are single-handing,

    Of course when racing you often need to gybe in close proximity to other boats,  and at very close to a specific geographical location (the gybe mark);   it is therefore mildly helpful to be looking forwards while you gybe.   But when not racing neither of those considerations apply;   there is rarely any need to gybe at a predetermined geographical location,  there is no need to do so in close proximity to other boats,  and you can afford to choose your moment for the seas.

    I do of course recognise that the ubiquitous split tail mainsheet led to the centre is a very efficient system in terms of minimising the sheet load for any given amount of lateral pull on the boom.

    A great many owners who both cruise and race have their boats set up so that they can switch between the two different sheeting systems,  and choose “centre sheeting” for racing and transom sheeting for cruising.

    As regards to a ratchet block,  again YES.   It is  very good half-way house between a standard block and a jamcleat.   The standard dictum is that you never,  ever,  cleat the mainsheet on a dinghy or unballasted boat,  but I confess that I do routinely use a jamcleat on the main,  and have done so ever since I discovered that many racers using sheeting led to the centre appeared to use it.  But then after a lifetime of dinghy sailing I ought to know what I am doing.  But even so,  I have capsized three times in the 18 years since I returned to dinghy sailing,  and every last one of those occasions was because I couldn’t get the sheet out of the cleat quickly enough.   (And  yes,  the angles were indeed so set as to make release immediate,  and entry required a deliberate act.)

    But a ratchet block has long been seen as the safe alternative to a jammer;   not quite as effective,  but significantly safer.

    Hope this helps,

     

    Oliver

    • This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Oliver Shaw.
    • This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Oliver Shaw.
    • This reply was modified 3 years, 1 month ago by Oliver Shaw.
    in reply to: Fitting rowlocks/ oar length #24358
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Oar length;   those on A Capella are 82½”,  or 2085 mm,  long.    So they are probably a nominal 7′ (84″).   I did warn you not to expect round numbers!

    They fit nicely between the forward buoyancy tank bulkhead and the aftmost side bench support.

    Hope this is helpful,

     

    Oliver

    in reply to: Fitting rowlocks/ oar length #24353
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Rowlock/Crutch Socket location:

    It would indeed be a good idea to experiment with a mock-up,  to see what is comfortable.    However the following dimensions have proved to work well for me,  and also for my various crews,  on two successive boats;   so they may well be a good start for you.

     

    Approximate measurements from A Capella

    (Measured, albeit only with tape measure, so a little crude, 12/01/22)

    Distance abaft centreline of thwart 19” or 48 cm

    Distance forward of at face of transom 53.5” or 136 cm

    As far outboard as possible; those on A Capella are not really far enough outboard.
    This is in order to avoid oars chafing on rubbing strake on the pull stroke.
    If using flush rowlock sockets it may also be necessary to raise the rowlocks slightly by means of a collar.

    Spindle diameter 12 mm (less than ½ inch)

     

    Length of oars.   Absolutely the longest that you can stow in the cockpit,  and even then you will feel that you would have liked them slightly longer.   I cannot remember whether A Capella‘s oars are nominally 7′ or nominally 8’,  but I will try to remember to measure up when I am at the boat in the next day or two.    However do be aware that the lengths of manufactured oars do not appear to be exact round numbers whether measured in Imperial or metric units.   If you can try a selection for size,  so much the better.    Or you could try a length of 2″ x 2″ timber to see what you can stow.

     

    Stowage of oars.    On A Capella (a Series 2 boat) I have them on the cockpit sole,  as far outboard as possible,  retained outboard by a length of shockcord.    That requires that the loom end be passed under the thwart (from aft) when stowing it,  and the maximum length is then determined by what will clear the stern deck as you work the oar forward under the thwart.

    On Tantrum (a series 1 boat,  with the original twin-slat side benches) back in the late sixties and early seventies I had the oars mounted above the outboard slat of the side benches,  retained in place by plastic “Terry” clips.   There,  choosing the length is less critical;   the oars merely need to fit into the cockpit.

    Hope this helps,

     

     

     

    Oliver

    • This reply was modified 3 years, 2 months ago by Oliver Shaw. Reason: Completion of reply after "blind" copy and past of data, which for some obscure technical reason was not visible until submitted
    in reply to: Dinghy Cruising Specific Facebook Page #24323
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Personally I won’t have anything to do with Facebook,  for what I consider to be good reasons;   but I certainly recognise its popularity,  and there may be some benefit in setting up a Facebook Group for GP14 Cruising.

    Would you like to take this on,  in liaison with Frank (since I retire from office tomorrow,  at the AGM)?

    I have the impression that the Association already has at least one Facebook Group,  so you would need to also liaise with whoever is running that.   I can probably find out who you need to contact,  and let you know off-list.

    Regards,

     

    Oliver

     

    in reply to: Scupper Flappers #24290
    Oliver Shaw
    Moderator

    Good advice there from Steve.

    Just one thing to add;   if you do decide to permanently blank off the holes it is still worth using transparent sheet material (e.g. perspex,  or acrylic),  so that you can actually see the trim of the boat.   The aim should be to have the transom just clear of the water,  so if you can see water lapping onto the bottom of the scuppers you have your weight too far aft  –  which is a very common error by GP14 sailors.

    Bed the sheeting onto sealant if you want a permanently watertight seal,   as well as securing it mechanically.

    Welome to the Association,  and enjoy your new acquisition!

     

    Oliver

Viewing 15 posts - 106 through 120 (of 708 total)