Inner forestay for Cal 39

Hi All, I want to put an inner forestay on my Cal 39. There is a (aluminium) tang welded on the front of the mast at about 7/8 height. Not sure of the strength of the weld but can add a yoke or something to the mast easy enough. Main issue is the deck attachment. Has anyone else done this? I'm thinking that a chainplate would need to be attached to the bulkhead at the rear of the anchor well. Would additional bracing be required, and beefing up of the bulkhead attachment to the hull sides? Or, could you run a cable from the deck fitting, through the anchor well to an attachment further down the bow ( though it would probably be a nuisance when anchoring)? James Cal 39-2 'Dagmar' Brisbane, Australia

Hi James, On the Cal 39-4 there is a inner forestay roughly lined up with the forepeak bulkhead. Not sure how the deck attachment is tied in, but seems to make sense to line it up with the bulkhead. [image: image.png] On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 1:59 AM th… [at] gmail.com [Cal_Boats] < Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> wrote: > > > Hi All, > I want to put an inner forestay on my Cal 39. > There is a (aluminium) tang welded on the front of the mast at about 7/8 > height. Not sure of the strength of the weld but can add a yoke or > something to the mast easy enough. > Main issue is the deck attachment. > Has anyone else done this? > I'm thinking that a chainplate would need to be attached to the bulkhead > at the rear of the anchor well. > Would additional bracing be required, and beefing up of the bulkhead > attachment to the hull sides? > > Or, could you run a cable from the deck fitting, through the anchor well > to an attachment further down the bow ( though it would probably be a > nuisance when anchoring)? > > James > Cal 39-2 > 'Dagmar' > Brisbane, > Australia > > > > -- ============ Eric Pederson 408-341-9606

> Hi All, > I want to put an inner forestay on my Cal 39. > There is a (aluminium) tang welded on the front of the mast at > about 7/8 height. Not sure of the strength of the weld but can add > a yoke or something to the mast easy enough. > Main issue is the deck attachment. > Has anyone else done this? > I'm thinking that a chainplate would need to be attached to the > bulkhead at the rear of the anchor well. > Would additional bracing be required, and beefing up of the > bulkhead attachment to the hull sides? > > Interesting question. I'll add some more. *First*, how much load is the inner forestay likely to carry? If it's just for running up another sail in light air, probably not much. If it's for some sort of heavy-weather sail in extreme conditions, then it's a lot (except that the original forestay itself will still be taking most of the load, right?). *Second*, if you need reinforcement by way of cable or rod running to hull points, could you devise an inverted V that would keep it out of the way of your ground tackle--that is, don;t go straight down but go outward on both sides instead? Chris Campbell Proud owner of Cal 20 #1220, which does not have a reinforced forestay but probably should.

Inner forestays…Hmm. A winter chin-scratcher. Rigging a storm jib on a slotted headstay with roller furling is not something I relish doing singlehanded in a blow. So a couple of years ago, I had Ullman Sails cut down my storm jib to fly on it’s wire luff in the triangle between the spinnaker topping lift and a pad eye installed over a foredeck beam .This set-up was used by the PO to fly a stay sail in lighter air. I’ve only flown the storm jib once, in about 20 knots. to see how it would set. It did just fine. The question nagging me is whether or not that inner headstay rig needs more strength to handle as much as 40 knots. The 3-30 shares it’s mast with the 34, and it’s a big section. I’d sure like to avoid baby stays at the top of the inner triangle. I’m also concerned if I need to rig some kind of extension from the pad eye to the hull itself, or if the loads on a quite small, probably 70 ft. sq. storm jib can be managed by just the deck. An extension would introduce some twist at the deck, because the bolt through the pad eye through bolt and the frame is about 4 “ long. Any thoughts? Fred Haas 3-30 Nemesis Tacoma 019, at 1:33 PM, ccampbell cc… [at] lsnm.org [Cal_Boats] <Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> wrote: > > > >> >> Hi All, >> I want to put an inner forestay on my Cal 39. >> There is a (aluminium) tang welded on the front of the mast at about 7/8 height. Not sure of the strength of the weld but can add a yoke or something to the mast easy enough. >> Main issue is the deck attachment. >> Has anyone else done this? >> I'm thinking that a chainplate would need to be attached to the bulkhead at the rear of the anchor well. >> Would additional bracing be required, and beefing up of the bulkhead attachment to the hull sides? >> >> > Interesting question. I'll add some more. First, how much load is the inner forestay likely to carry? If it's just for running up another sail in light air, probably not much. If it's for some sort of heavy-weather sail in extreme conditions, then it's a lot (except that the original forestay itself will still be taking most of the load, right?). > > Second, if you need reinforcement by way of cable or rod running to hull points, could you devise an inverted V that would keep it out of the way of your ground tackle--that is, don;t go straight down but go outward on both sides instead? > > Chris Campbell > > Proud owner of Cal 20 #1220, which does not have a reinforced forestay but probably should. > > >

thanks for your replies. I'm thinking of using it for a No.3 and storm jib, and having the genoa as a lighter air sail on the forestay. Hmm, splitting the cable under deck...not enough strength in the side panels without more support..unless it's where the floor of the anchor well sits. Worth looking at where it works out to. Or, down alongside the bulkhead itself. But then would have ugly plates outside the hull there. Might just have to make sure the bulkhead to hull and deck joins are beefy, or beefed up, and something to take the backward force of the stay at deck level...laminate in extra beam/s, either athwartships butting up to the rear of the bulkhead, or triangulate them from the centreline out to the hull sides under the deck. James

We have a cutter rigged Cal 39 mark ll i will Take pics.. Edward & Helen SantaCruz On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 10:40 PM th… [at] gmail.com [Cal_Boats] < Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> wrote: > > > thanks for your replies. > I'm thinking of using it for a No.3 and storm jib, and having the genoa as > a lighter air sail on the forestay. > > Hmm, splitting the cable under deck...not enough strength in the side > panels without more support..unless it's where the floor of the anchor well > sits. Worth looking at where it works out to. > Or, down alongside the bulkhead itself. But then would have ugly plates > outside the hull there. > Might just have to make sure the bulkhead to hull and deck joins are > beefy, or beefed up, and something to take the backward force of the stay > at deck level...laminate in extra beam/s, either athwartships butting up to > the rear of the bulkhead, or triangulate them from the centreline out to > the hull sides under the deck. > > James > >

Of keen interest is where does the inner forestay intersect the mast and do you use running backs to counter the pull from the inner stay? Jeff Thayer S/V Ecco San Francisco. Sent from one of those iPhone thingies. > On Feb 14, 2019, at 11:49 AM, Edward Stancil e.… [at] gmail.com [Cal_Boats] <Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> wrote: > > We have a cutter rigged > Cal 39 mark ll i will > Take pics.. > > Edward & Helen > SantaCruz > >> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019, 10:40 PM th… [at] gmail.com [Cal_Boats] <Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> wrote: >> >> thanks for your replies. >> I'm thinking of using it for a No.3 and storm jib, and having the genoa as a lighter air sail on the forestay.. >> >> Hmm, splitting the cable under deck...not enough strength in the side panels without more support..unless it's where the floor of the anchor well sits. Worth looking at where it works out to. >> Or, down alongside the bulkhead itself. But then would have ugly plates outside the hull there. >> >> Might just have to make sure the bulkhead to hull and deck joins are beefy, or beefed up, and something to take the backward force of the stay at deck level...laminate in extra beam/s, either athwartships butting up to the rear of the bulkhead, or triangulate them from the centreline out to the hull sides under the deck. >> >> James > >

Jeff Thayer, I don't have the exact height of the welded tab on the front of the mast but I think it is about 7/8 height. Yes, I think I will rig some dyneema running backstays to use while the stay is engaged. (I also want to make the stay removable) Looks like it's the bulkhead forming the anchor well where the deck attachment needs to go. I will check how the bulkhead is attached and probably need to reinforce. As Edward pointed out to me, the forestay should be taking a lot of the load too so may not need to worry as much, though I would like it to be able to take full rig load in case I ever lost the forestay. I intend to have the inner stay rigged most of the time while passage making (as insurance) James