Mast plate

Has anyone installed a mast plate at the base of the mast to accept turning blocks for leading lines aft? I just bought a really nice one from Seals and I'm getting ready to install it. I like the idea of not drilling holes for every block I need at deck level, I have a childish aversion to drilling ANY holes in my boat. Any recommendations on installation (or a good shrink for my hole drilling issues)?

Glen, We installed a mast plate on Magic a few months ago. You'll like it. I assume you have the rig stepped. Take a look at our project here. I'll be happy to answer any specific questions you may have. Regards, Michael Duvall s/v Magic, Cal 2-27 Pompano Beach, FL From: glen thorpe <gl… [at] yahoo.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Tue, February 2, 2010 11:18:16 PM Subject: [Cal_Boats] Mast plate Has anyone installed a mast plate at the base of the mast to accept turning blocks for leading lines aft? I just bought a really nice one from Seals and I'm getting ready to install it. I like the idea of not drilling holes for every block I need at deck level, I have a childish aversion to drilling ANY holes in my boat. Any recommendations on installation (or a good shrink for my hole drilling issues)?

It has been a few years, but I remember having to drill some holes for the bolts the current mast base sits on. Then I installed it on top of a mass of Life Caulk and under the old mast base. It was really very simple. The hard part is finding dollars in the budget for new deck organizers, rope clutches, and cabin top winches. I am not there yet. Terry Spencer Cal 2-29 From: glen thorpe <gl… [at] yahoo.com> Reply-To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2010 20:18:16 -0800 (PST) To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Subject: [Cal_Boats] Mast plate Has anyone installed a mast plate at the base of the mast to accept turning blocks for leading lines aft? I just bought a really nice one from Seals and I'm getting ready to install it. I like the idea of not drilling holes for every block I need at deck level, I have a childish aversion to drilling ANY holes in my boat. Any recommendations on installation (or a good shrink for my hole drilling issues)?

Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

I see the "I" listed as 42' for a CAL 36 and Cruising 36. Yet, the mast section is only approximately 40 feet long and appears never to have been cut down. is the 42' because it is coachroof stepped and takes into consideration the coachroof height? On the CAL 40, it shows an "I" of 46, but how long is th emast section above the coachroof? More sleepless ponderings. Reggie CAL 27 T/2 "Knot Ready"

*I *: Height of the foretriangle, measured from the highest point of the sail attachment to the sheer line at the point abeam the mast. The point of sheer line is the intersection of the hull and deck. Allen On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 7:49 AM, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > I see the "I" listed as 42' for a CAL 36 and Cruising 36. Yet, the mast > section is only approximately 40 feet long and appears never to have been > cut down. is the 42' because it is coachroof stepped and takes into > consideration the coachroof height? > > On the CAL 40, it shows an "I" of 46, but how long is th emast section > above the coachroof? > > More sleepless ponderings. > > Reggie > CAL 27 T/2 "Knot Ready" > >

Reggie, /Celtic Naut/'s mast is sitting next to her on the hard. I'll ask Beth to measure it for you. BTW her hull-to-deck joint is nearly finished being repaired. When I was able to go home last, The guy fixing it handed me what appeared to be a rock that crumbled in my hand. It was the 45 year old caulk. It had the composition of drywall! No wonder she leaked all over Beth's stuff! The toe-rail and cockpit coaming is being replaced as well with a wood called "Ipe". This stuff is much denser than teak and has all the good oils in it too. It will last in a marine environment. If I were worried about weight for racing, i wouldn't have used it because it is HEAVY stuff. It has a deep red color to it and will look awesome. Mike On 2/3/2010 10:49 AM, r good wrote: > > > > I see the "I" listed as 42' for a CAL 36 and Cruising 36. Yet, the > mast section is only approximately 40 feet long and appears never to > have been cut down. is the 42' because it is coachroof stepped and > takes into consideration the coachroof height? > > On the CAL 40, it shows an "I" of 46, but how long is th emast section > above the coachroof? > > More sleepless ponderings. > > Reggie > CAL 27 T/2 "Knot Ready" > >

thanks, Mike what do you plan to do with the gorgeous "new" CAL 40? To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com From: mi… [at] wahini.org Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 14:02:10 -0500 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast height Reggie, Celtic Naut's mast is sitting next to her on the hard. I'll ask Beth to measure it for you. BTW her hull-to-deck joint is nearly finished being repaired. When I was able to go home last, The guy fixing it handed me what appeared to be a rock that crumbled in my hand. It was the 45 year old caulk. It had the composition of drywall! No wonder she leaked all over Beth's stuff! The toe-rail and cockpit coaming is being replaced as well with a wood called "Ipe". This stuff is much denser than teak and has all the good oils in it too. It will last in a marine environment. If I were worried about weight for racing, i wouldn't have used it because it is HEAVY stuff. It has a deep red color to it and will look awesome. Mike On 2/3/2010 10:49 AM, r good wrote: I see the "I" listed as 42' for a CAL 36 and Cruising 36. Yet, the mast section is only approximately 40 feet long and appears never to have been cut down. is the 42' because it is coachroof stepped and takes into consideration the coachroof height? On the CAL 40, it shows an "I" of 46, but how long is th emast section above the coachroof? More sleepless ponderings. Reggie CAL 27 T/2 "Knot Ready"

Sail her, of course! It's going to be quite awhile before we get her back in the water. Did you read in /Latitude 38/, about Ms. Liz Clark and her Cal-40 she's sailing solo on? Well, after spending months in Tahiti fixing her bottom up, she splashed and didn't make it very far before having to turn back due to a leak at the trailing edge of her keel above the propshaft and under the engine pan. Wanna guess what she and I have in common? Yep, when I was home last, I looked in that area and was actally able to see the crack from the outside. I will have to fix this too and I don't trust anybody else to be able to do it. Damn! The good thing about it is that since I have to pull the engine to get under it, I'll be able to do a rebuild in the salon. When I have time again. On 2/3/2010 2:28 PM, r good wrote: > > > thanks, Mike > what do you plan to do with the gorgeous "new" CAL 40? > >

wonder if the 36's suffer from the same problem? Reggie a leak at the trailing edge of her keel above the propshaft and under the engine pan.

wonder if the 36's suffer from the same problem? Reggie CAL 40:a leak at the trailing edge of her keel above the propshaft and under the engine pan.

I looked at yours when I replaced the prop and it seemed ok. As for others? I don't know. I do know that when Beth and I repaired the blisters and stuff, I repaired the trailing edge of the keel below the prop shaft where it was obvious that PO had backed down on her chain hard. Maybe when that damage was done, the torque had cracked the thin edge above as well. I don't know. On 2/3/2010 2:57 PM, r good wrote: > > > wonder if the 36's suffer from the same problem? > Reggie > > a leak at the trailing edge of her keel above the propshaft and under > the engine pan. >

My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) Reggie what a trig-y question! To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com From: bo… [at] yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

Reggie, do you mind if I use the Pythagorean Theorem and properties of sines, cosines, and tangents to solve your triangle question? I assume you are looking for the hypotenuse...or, was that a trick question? Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 7:06:46 PM Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) Reggie what a trig-y question! To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

use whatever tickles your fancy, but no hypotenuse on an equilateral triangle Reggie To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com From: bo… [at] yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:03:52 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake Reggie, do you mind if I use the Pythagorean Theorem and properties of sines, cosines, and tangents to solve your triangle question? I assume you are looking for the hypotenuse...or, was that a trick question? Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 7:06:46 PM Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) Reggie what a trig-y question! To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

thanks! To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com From: bo… [at] yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

.916 feet On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:06 PM, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > Reggie > what a trig-y question! > > > ------------------------------ > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay > set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... > > Will update after he comes out.... > > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> > *To:* ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > *Sent:* Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > *Subject:* [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > properly. > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > fore-aft mast bend. > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > the mast. > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > raked mast? > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much > is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > foresail furled around the forestay? > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep > after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 > year old boat offshore. > > Reggie > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > >

One of my mentors, the gent who insisted I buy a Cal24, would hoist a rake to the top of his mast after sailing, so the tangs of the rake were above the mast top; it kept the sea boids of his mast top and kept his deck a mite bit cleaner. So, if you can figure out the trigonometric mast rake, this alternative mast rake isn't bad. Jerry --- On Wed, 2/3/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 5:15 PM use whatever tickles your fancy, but no hypotenuse on an equilateral triangle Reggie To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:03:52 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake Reggie, do you mind if I use the Pythagorean Theorem and properties of sines, cosines, and tangents to solve your triangle question? I assume you are looking for the hypotenuse.. .or, was that a trick question? Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 7:06:46 PM Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) Reggie what a trig-y question! To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

interesting. 11 inches. I wouldn't have thought it would be quite that much. Without doing the math I would have guessed about half that. Must be because I have been used to dealing with my shorter mast. Reggie CAL 27 T/2 "Knot REady" CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com From: al… [at] PaloAltoPhoto.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 18:19:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake .916 feet On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:06 PM, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) Reggie what a trig-y question! To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com From: bo… [at] yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

Actually, we're dealing with a Right Triangle, with the "I" being the perpendicular side and the mast being the hypotenuse. So, figuring [sin 1.5 degrees * 35 feet] = 0.9165 feet = 11 inches. If you use Windows but don't have a scientific calculator with the trig functions, go to <START><ALL PROGRAMS><ACCESSORIES><CALCULATOR> and open it up; then go to the VIEW pulldown and select SCIENTIFIC. On the question of mast bend, ol' Bill Lapworth never liked the idea of bendy masts. Most Cals have "tree-trunk" extrusions that make mast bending difficult. So just keep Bill happy up in sailor's heaven and set 'er up straight. On 2/3/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > > Reggie > > what a trig-y question! > > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... > > Will update after he comes out.... > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> > To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > properly. > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > fore-aft mast bend. > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > the mast. > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > raked mast? > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > foresail furled around the forestay? > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old > boat offshore. > > Reggie > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > >

Your T2 is an IOR-rule boat; proportionally, your mast has more height-to-length than my old CCA-rule Cal 25-1 does! One time, just for the giggles, I led my (spreader-height) pole lift to the bow and put the other end on a primary winch and started cranking. With everything creaking and the pole lift pianop-wire tight, I think I got all of 1/2 inch of bend. At that point, I decided that trying to bend the mast was pointless. On 2/4/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > interesting. 11 inches. I wouldn't have thought it would be quite that > much. Without doing the math I would have guessed about half that. Must be > because I have been used to dealing with my shorter mast. > > Reggie > > CAL 27 T/2 "Knot REady" > > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > From: al… [at] PaloAltoPhoto.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 18:19:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake > > > > > > .916 feet > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:06 PM, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > Reggie > what a trig-y question! > > > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... > > Will update after he comes out.... > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> > To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > properly. > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > fore-aft mast bend. > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > the mast. > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > raked mast? > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > foresail furled around the forestay? > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old > boat offshore. > > Reggie > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

a tall mast CAL 27 pop-top in our yacht club has a removable inner forestay. when attached, if he tightens the backstay, he can induce what looks like amazing mast bent in the "tree trunk" mast. I was very surprised. However, I don't agree with doing it. I think it over stresses things not originally designed for those stresses. Reggie To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com From: ca… [at] gmail.com Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2010 09:52:07 -0600 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake Your T2 is an IOR-rule boat; proportionally, your mast has more height-to-length than my old CCA-rule Cal 25-1 does! One time, just for the giggles, I led my (spreader-height) pole lift to the bow and put the other end on a primary winch and started cranking. With everything creaking and the pole lift pianop-wire tight, I think I got all of 1/2 inch of bend. At that point, I decided that trying to bend the mast was pointless. On 2/4/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > interesting. 11 inches. I wouldn't have thought it would be quite that > much. Without doing the math I would have guessed about half that. Must be > because I have been used to dealing with my shorter mast. > > Reggie > > CAL 27 T/2 "Knot REady" > > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > From: al… [at] PaloAltoPhoto.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 18:19:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake > > > > > > .916 feet > > > On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:06 PM, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > Reggie > what a trig-y question! > > > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... > > Will update after he comes out.... > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> > To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > properly. > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > fore-aft mast bend. > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > the mast. > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > raked mast? > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > foresail furled around the forestay? > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old > boat offshore. > > Reggie > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Actually the "math" can be easier: if you calculate the circumfrence of a circle with the radius of the mast hight (pi x d) or 3.14159 x 35 x 2 = 219.911ft and devide that by degrees (360 in a circle) .610 ft multiplied by 1.5 degrees = .9163 feet multiplied by 12 to get = 10.996 inches with the "tree trunk" mast (not bendy) can you adjust the rake with a digial level? JOhn ---- Robert Thompson <ca… [at] gmail.com> wrote: > Actually, we're dealing with a Right Triangle, with the "I" being the > perpendicular side and the mast being the hypotenuse. So, figuring > [sin 1.5 degrees * 35 feet] = 0.9165 feet = 11 inches. If you use > Windows but don't have a scientific calculator with the trig > functions, go to <START><ALL PROGRAMS><ACCESSORIES><CALCULATOR> and > open it up; then go to the VIEW pulldown and select SCIENTIFIC. > > On the question of mast bend, ol' Bill Lapworth never liked the idea > of bendy masts. Most Cals have "tree-trunk" extrusions that make mast > bending difficult. So just keep Bill happy up in sailor's heaven and > set 'er up straight. > > On 2/3/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > > > > Reggie > > > > what a trig-y question! > > > > > > > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com > > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set > > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it happened > > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... > > > > Will update after he comes out.... > > Charles > > S/V Boomerang! > > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> > > To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > > properly. > > > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > > fore-aft mast bend. > > > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > > the mast. > > > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > > raked mast? > > > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is > > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > > foresail furled around the forestay? > > > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old > > boat offshore. > > > > Reggie > > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Or, for small angles the sin of the angle is equal to the angle. The only problem is that this is in radians so 1.5 degrees = 3.14 * 1.5 / 180 = .026ish radians and .026ish * 35 = .916. This works for tangents as well and in this case where you really have two right triangles of .75 degrees, it just doesn't matter. That is the beauty of small angles. So, if you can remember how to convert from degrees to radians then all you need is the calculator on your cell phone. Allen On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 7:43 AM, Robert Thompson <ca… [at] gmail.com> wrote: > > > Actually, we're dealing with a Right Triangle, with the "I" being the > perpendicular side and the mast being the hypotenuse. So, figuring > [sin 1.5 degrees * 35 feet] = 0.9165 feet = 11 inches. If you use > Windows but don't have a scientific calculator with the trig > functions, go to <START><ALL PROGRAMS><ACCESSORIES><CALCULATOR> and > open it up; then go to the VIEW pulldown and select SCIENTIFIC. > > On the question of mast bend, ol' Bill Lapworth never liked the idea > of bendy masts. Most Cals have "tree-trunk" extrusions that make mast > bending difficult. So just keep Bill happy up in sailor's heaven and > set 'er up straight. > > > On 2/3/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com <my1972ih%40hotmail.com>> wrote: > > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > > > > Reggie > > > > what a trig-y question! > > > > > > > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com <Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> > > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com <boomerang_cal39%40yahoo.com> > > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay > set > > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it > happened > > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... > > > > Will update after he comes out.... > > Charles > > S/V Boomerang! > > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com <my1972ih%40hotmail.com>> > > To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com <cal_boats%40yahoogroups.com> > > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little > fore-aft > > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, > it > > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 > ft > > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > > properly. > > > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a > single > > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > > fore-aft mast bend. > > > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend > of > > the mast. > > > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 > owners > > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > > raked mast? > > > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much > is > > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the > breeze > > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > > foresail furled around the forestay? > > > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year > old > > boat offshore. > > > > Reggie > > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

That is what radians are. On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:11 AM, <jr… [at] triad.rr.com> wrote: > > > Actually the "math" can be easier: > > if you calculate the circumfrence of a circle with the radius of the mast > hight (pi x d) or 3.14159 x 35 x 2 = 219.911ft > and devide that by degrees (360 in a circle) .610 ft > multiplied by 1.5 degrees = .9163 feet > multiplied by 12 to get = 10.996 inches > > with the "tree trunk" mast (not bendy) can you adjust the rake with a > digial level? > > JOhn > > > ---- Robert Thompson <ca… [at] gmail.com <cavernuke%40gmail.com>> wrote: > > Actually, we're dealing with a Right Triangle, with the "I" being the > > perpendicular side and the mast being the hypotenuse. So, figuring > > [sin 1.5 degrees * 35 feet] = 0.9165 feet = 11 inches. If you use > > Windows but don't have a scientific calculator with the trig > > functions, go to <START><ALL PROGRAMS><ACCESSORIES><CALCULATOR> and > > open it up; then go to the VIEW pulldown and select SCIENTIFIC. > > > > On the question of mast bend, ol' Bill Lapworth never liked the idea > > of bendy masts. Most Cals have "tree-trunk" extrusions that make mast > > bending difficult. So just keep Bill happy up in sailor's heaven and > > set 'er up straight. > > > > On 2/3/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com <my1972ih%40hotmail.com>> wrote: > > > > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them > is > > > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > > > > > > Reggie > > > > > > what a trig-y question! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com <Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> > > > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com <boomerang_cal39%40yahoo.com> > > > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > > > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby > stay set > > > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > > > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > > > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless.... We think it > happened > > > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > > > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore.... > > > > > > Will update after he comes out.... > > > Charles > > > S/V Boomerang! > > > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > > > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com <my1972ih%40hotmail.com>> > > > To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com <cal_boats%40yahoogroups.com> > > > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > > > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little > fore-aft > > > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. > However, it > > > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > > > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 > ft > > > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > > > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > > > properly. > > > > > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a > single > > > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay > or > > > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > > > fore-aft mast bend. > > > > > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are > there > > > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral > bend of > > > the mast. > > > > > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 > owners > > > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > > > > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward > lower > > > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > > > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > > > raked mast? > > > > > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How > much is > > > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > > > > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the > breeze > > > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > > > foresail furled around the forestay? > > > > > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep > after > > > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 > year old > > > boat offshore. > > > > > > Reggie > > > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

See attached. On 2/3/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > use whatever tickles your fancy, but no hypotenuse on an equilateral > triangle > > Reggie > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:03:52 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake > > > > > > > > > Reggie, do you mind if I use the Pythagorean Theorem and properties of > sines, cosines, and tangents to solve your triangle question? > > I assume you are looking for the hypotenuse...or, was that a trick question? > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> > To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 7:06:46 PM > Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake > > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > Reggie > what a trig-y question! > > > > To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com > From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . > > Will update after he comes out.... > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> > To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > properly. > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > fore-aft mast bend. > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > the mast. > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > raked mast? > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > foresail furled around the forestay? > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old > boat offshore. > > Reggie > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Shouldn't it slope the other way? ;-) On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Robert Thompson <ca… [at] gmail.com> wrote: > > [Attachment(s) <#12699efb61e2d529_TopText> from Robert Thompson included > below] > > See attached. > > On 2/3/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com <my1972ih%40hotmail.com>> wrote: > > > > use whatever tickles your fancy, but no hypotenuse on an equilateral > > triangle > > > > Reggie > > > > > > > > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com <Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> > > From: bo… [at] yahoo.com <boomerang_cal39%40yahoo.com> > > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:03:52 -0800 > > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reggie, do you mind if I use the Pythagorean Theorem and properties of > > sines, cosines, and tangents to solve your triangle question? > > > > I assume you are looking for the hypotenuse...or, was that a trick > question? > > Charles > > S/V Boomerang! > > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com <my1972ih%40hotmail.com>> > > To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com <cal_boats%40yahoogroups.com> > > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 7:06:46 PM > > Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake > > > > > > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > > Reggie > > what a trig-y question! > > > > > > > > To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com > > From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com > > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay > set > > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it > happened > > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . > > > > Will update after he comes out.... > > Charles > > S/V Boomerang! > > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> > > To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com > > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little > fore-aft > > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, > it > > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 > ft > > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > > properly. > > > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a > single > > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > > fore-aft mast bend. > > > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend > of > > the mast. > > > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 > owners > > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > > raked mast? > > > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much > is > > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the > breeze > > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > > foresail furled around the forestay? > > > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year > old > > boat offshore. > > > > Reggie > > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Does anyone have access to the mast height on a Cal 27 Mark III? Thanks... David Cal 27 Mark III, Latitude Changer --- On Wed, 2/3/10, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast height To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 2:28 PM thanks, Mike what do you plan to do with the gorgeous "new" CAL 40? To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com From: mike@wahini. org Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 14:02:10 -0500 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast height Reggie, Celtic Naut's mast is sitting next to her on the hard. I'll ask Beth to measure it for you. BTW her hull-to-deck joint is nearly finished being repaired. When I was able to go home last, The guy fixing it handed me what appeared to be a rock that crumbled in my hand. It was the 45 year old caulk. It had the composition of drywall! No wonder she leaked all over Beth's stuff! The toe-rail and cockpit coaming is being replaced as well with a wood called "Ipe". This stuff is much denser than teak and has all the good oils in it too. It will last in a marine environment. If I were worried about weight for racing, i wouldn't have used it because it is HEAVY stuff. It has a deep red color to it and will look awesome. Mike On 2/3/2010 10:49 AM, r good wrote: I see the "I" listed as 42' for a CAL 36 and Cruising 36. Yet, the mast section is only approximately 40 feet long and appears never to have been cut down. is the 42' because it is coachroof stepped and takes into consideration the coachroof height? On the CAL 40, it shows an "I" of 46, but how long is th emast section above the coachroof? More sleepless ponderings. Reggie CAL 27 T/2 "Knot Ready"

According to http://pages.sssnet.com/go2erie/cal27all.htm * Cal 27-3 * I=33, J=11, P=28, E=11 --Michael-- From: David Field <fi… [at] yahoo.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com; Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, February 4, 2010 1:02:51 PM Subject: [Cal_Boats] RE: Mast Height of Cal 27 Mark III Does anyone have access to the mast height on a Cal 27 Mark III? Thanks... David Cal 27 Mark III, Latitude Changer --- On Wed, 2/3/10, r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> wrote: >From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> >Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast height >To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com >Date: Wednesday, February 3, 2010, 2:28 PM > > >> > > > > > > > >> > >> > >thanks, Mike >>what do you plan to do with the gorgeous "new" CAL 40? > > >To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com >From: mike@wahini. org >Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 14:02:10 -0500 >Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast height > > >>Reggie, >Celtic Naut's mast is sitting next to her on the hard. I'll ask Beth to measure it for you. >BTW her hull-to-deck joint is nearly finished being repaired. When I was able to go home last, The guy fixing it handed me what appeared to be a rock that crumbled in my hand. It was the 45 year old caulk. It had the composition of drywall! No wonder she leaked all over Beth's stuff! The toe-rail and cockpit coaming is being replaced as well with a wood called "Ipe". This stuff is much denser than teak and has all the good oils in it too. It will last in a marine environment. If I were worried about weight for racing, i wouldn't have used it because it is HEAVY stuff. It has a deep red color to it and will look awesome. >Mike > >On 2/3/2010 10:49 AM, r good wrote: > > >> >> I see the "I" listed as 42' for a CAL 36 and Cruising 36. Yet, the mast section is only approximately 40 feet long and appears never to have been cut down. is the 42' because it is coachroof stepped and takes into consideration the coachroof height? >> >>On the CAL 40, it shows an "I" of 46, but how long is th emast section above the coachroof? >> >>More sleepless ponderings. >> >>Reggie >>CAL 27 T/2 "Knot Ready" >> >> > >

--- In Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com, David Field <field1941@...> wrote: > > Does anyone have access to the mast height on a Cal 27 Mark III? > Thanks... > David > Cal 27 Mark III, Latitude Changer > I've got an owner's manual that says "Mast Height Above Water" is 36' 4" or 11.1 meters.

Many years ago I owned a Lighting Class boat 19 feet long with a mast of about 25'. On these boats we racked the mast 38-40 inches and when the wind came up we pulled the backstay on hard and put a foot or more of bend into the rig. This makes the discussions of bending these tree trunks we carry kind of funny. I have a hard time believing that anything we do will have any significant effect. John B. Cal 227 #650 _____ From: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com [mailto:Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Allen Edwards Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2010 12:36 PM To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake Shouldn't it slope the other way? ;-) On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Robert Thompson <cavernuke@gmail. <mailto:ca… [at] gmail.com> com> wrote: [Attachment(s) <> from Robert Thompson included below] See attached. On 2/3/10, r good <my1972ih@hotmail. <mailto:my1972ih%40hotmail.com> com> wrote: > > use whatever tickles your fancy, but no hypotenuse on an equilateral > triangle > > Reggie > > > > To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou <mailto:Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com > From: boomerang_cal39@ <mailto:boomerang_cal39%40yahoo.com> yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:03:52 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake > > > > > > > > > Reggie, do you mind if I use the Pythagorean Theorem and properties of > sines, cosines, and tangents to solve your triangle question? > > I assume you are looking for the hypotenuse...or, was that a trick question? > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. <mailto:my1972ih%40hotmail.com> com> > To: cal_boats@yahoogrou <mailto:cal_boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 7:06:46 PM > Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake > > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > Reggie > what a trig-y question! > > > > To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com > From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . > > Will update after he comes out.... > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> > To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > properly. > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > fore-aft mast bend. > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > the mast. > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > raked mast? > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > foresail furled around the forestay? > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old > boat offshore. > > Reggie > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > > >

John Boyce wrote: > > > Many years ago I owned a Lighting Class boat 19 feet long with a mast > of about 25'. On these boats we racked the mast 38-40 inches and when > the wind came up we pulled the backstay on hard and put a foot or more > of bend into the rig. This makes the discussions of bending these > tree trunks we carry kind of funny. I have a hard time believing that > anything we do will have any significant effect. Want to see mast bend? Go here and look at the photos under "miscellaneous pictures": http://www.idniyra.org/photos.htm. Chris Campbell > > >

John Boyce wrote: > > > Many years ago I owned a Lighting Class boat 19 feet long with a mast > of about 25'. On these boats we racked the mast 38-40 inches and when > the wind came up we pulled the backstay on hard and put a foot or more > of bend into the rig. This makes the discussions of bending these > tree trunks we carry kind of funny. I have a hard time believing that > anything we do will have any significant effect. Want to see mast bend? Go here and look at the photos under "miscellaneous pictures": http://www.idniyra.org/photos.htm. You need a flat sail to keep an iceboat upright. Chris Campbell > > >

And, that, was the trick. there is a hypotenuse in the equation...just not obvious.... Approximately .09165 inches.... Sorry, been traveling today....at my townhouse in DC with with my first access to internet for play time.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 8:15:05 PM Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake use whatever tickles your fancy, but no hypotenuse on an equilateral triangle Reggie To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 17:03:52 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake Reggie, do you mind if I use the Pythagorean Theorem and properties of sines, cosines, and tangents to solve your triangle question? I assume you are looking for the hypotenuse.. .or, was that a trick question? Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 7:06:46 PM Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) Reggie what a trig-y question! To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

Whoops...someone beat me to it! Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: Allen Edwards <al… [at] PaloAltoPhoto.com> To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 9:19:32 PM Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake .916 feet On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:06 PM, r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> wrote: >so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) >Reggie >what a trig-y question! > > >________________________________ To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com >From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com >Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 >Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > >My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . > >Will update after he comes out.... > Charles >S/V Boomerang! >1980 Cal 39, Mark II >St Michaels, MD > > > > > From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> >To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com >Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM >Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > >Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. > >It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. > >Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. > >This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. > >I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? > >And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > >And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? > >And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. > >Reggie >CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > >

And another....great answer, Robert... And to take it a step further, from what I understand, Ol' Bill wanted the masts that way to avoid secondary spreaders for stability...and still be set up for babystays for the cutter rig... Now, I know that is typical of some mast manufacturers....but I think he was the first.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: Robert Thompson <ca… [at] gmail.com> To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, February 4, 2010 10:43:22 AM Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast rake Actually, we're dealing with a Right Triangle, with the "I" being the perpendicular side and the mast being the hypotenuse. So, figuring [sin 1.5 degrees * 35 feet] = 0.9165 feet = 11 inches. If you use Windows but don't have a scientific calculator with the trig functions, go to <START><ALL PROGRAMS><ACCESSORI ES><CALCULATOR> and open it up; then go to the VIEW pulldown and select SCIENTIFIC. On the question of mast bend, ol' Bill Lapworth never liked the idea of bendy masts. Most Cals have "tree-trunk" extrusions that make mast bending difficult. So just keep Bill happy up in sailor's heaven and set 'er up straight. On 2/3/10, r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> wrote: > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is > 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > > Reggie > > what a trig-y question! > > > > > To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com > From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set > up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . > > Will update after he comes out.... > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > > > > > From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> > To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com > Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > properly. > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > fore-aft mast bend. > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > the mast. > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > raked mast? > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is > that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > foresail furled around the forestay? > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after > waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old > boat offshore. > > Reggie > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > >

by defenition there was no hypotenuse in the triangle. "two sides of a triangle are each 35'..." If a person measures off 35', marks the mast and then swings the tape aft of the mast and measures the distance between the mark on the mast and the 35' mark on the tape, both the mast side and the tapoe side are 35' long, hence no hypotenuse, an equilateral triangle= having two sides of equal length. No two sides are the same length in any right triangle. Reggie so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) Reggie what a trig-y question! To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . Will update after he comes out.... Charles S/V Boomerang! 1980 Cal 39, Mark II St Michaels, MD From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. Reggie CAL Cruising 36 "Submit"

Correct. However, with an angle of only 1.5 degrees, treating it as a right triangle will give a solution that is nearly perfect, and thus, useful. The true measurement will be ever so slightly longer than that calculated using a right triangle. The calculation is of the opposite -- Sin 1.5 = Opposite over Hypotenuse(35') (SOHP). Donald Dutton "Twenty Years from now, you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the things you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover." ........Mark Twain From: r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> To: ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Sent: Thu, February 4, 2010 4:18:54 PM Subject: RE: [Cal_Boats] mast rake by defenition there was no hypotenuse in the triangle. "two sides of a triangle are each 35'..." If a person measures off 35', marks the mast and then swings the tape aft of the mast and measures the distance between the mark on the mast and the 35' mark on the tape, both the mast side and the tapoe side are 35' long, hence no hypotenuse, an equilateral triangle= having two sides of equal length. No two sides are the same length in any right triangle. Reggie so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) Reggie what a trig-y question! > >________________________________ >To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com >From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com >Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 >Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > >My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . > >Will update after he comes out.... > Charles >S/V Boomerang! >1980 Cal 39, Mark II >St Michaels, MD > > > > > > From: r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com> >To: cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com >Sent: Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM >Subject: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > >Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress properly. > >It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat fore-aft mast bend. > >Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of the mast. > >This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners manual and other CAL info I've seen. > >I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft raked mast? > >And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > >And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a foresail furled around the forestay? > >And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 year old boat offshore. > >Reggie >CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > >

Absolutely correct, the hypotenuse is 1/8 of an inch longer than the adjacent side. So, if the hypotenuse is 35 feet, the opposite side is .916, then the adjacent side is only 34.988 feet. :-) Be careful when you make that measurement! Allen On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 4:18 PM, r good <my… [at] hotmail.com> wrote: > > > > by defenition there was no hypotenuse in the triangle. "two sides of a > triangle are each 35'..." If a person measures off 35', marks the mast and > then swings the tape aft of the mast and measures the distance between the > mark on the mast and the 35' mark on the tape, both the mast side and the > tapoe side are 35' long, hence no hypotenuse, an equilateral triangle= > having two sides of equal length. No two sides are the same length in any > right triangle. > Reggie > > > so, if two sides of a triangle are each 35' and the angle between > them is 1.5 degrees, how long is the third side? (equilateral triangle) > Reggie > what a trig-y question! > > > > ------------------------------ > To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou ps.com <Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> > From: boomerang_cal39@ yahoo.com <bo… [at] yahoo.com> > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2010 13:03:32 -0800 > Subject: Re: [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > My manual calls for a 1.5 degree aft rake....but then I have a baby stay > set up for the staysail...not sure if that applies to you Reggie, but I am > having a rigger come out to check it out....along with the leaking mast > step...a little tiny leak, but a leak nonetheless. ... We think it happened > when the mast was restepped after making the long trip, over hill, over > dell, from Long Beach to Baltimore... . > > Will update after he comes out.... > > Charles > S/V Boomerang! > 1980 Cal 39, Mark II > St Michaels, MD > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* r good <my1972ih@hotmail. com <my… [at] hotmail.com>> > *To:* cal_boats@yahoogrou ps.com <ca… [at] yahoogroups.com> > *Sent:* Wed, February 3, 2010 10:41:30 AM > *Subject:* [Cal_Boats] mast tuning(back to sailing stuff) > > > > > Somewhere I've developed the thought that there should be a little fore-aft > mast bend tuned into even a masthead rigged single spreader rig. However, it > seems odd to even consider attempting this with a CAL 40 mast section, > particularly when my mast, CAL 36, is made of the same section but is 4 ft > shorter. Also, that seems it would put huge stress on the forward lower > shroud, which isn't really set far enough forward to take this stress > properly. > > It seems most CAL's with single spreaders were designed with only a single > lower shroud rather than split lowers, and no jumper stay or baby stay or > lower forestay or whatever they should be called, hence no way to creat > fore-aft mast bend. > > Consequently I've come to the conclusion that the lower shrouds are there > assist in holding the mast down onto the boat and to prevent lateral bend of > the mast. > > This seems to coincide with tuning instructions found in the CAL 40 owners > manual and other CAL info I've seen. > > I notice original specs on the shroud for the 40 showed the forward lower > slightly larger diameter than the aft lower. I ask myself why that migh > thave been. Is it to compensate for the extra stress of a slightly aft > raked mast? > > And the instructions for tuning always say "a slight rake aft". How much > is that? In degrees? In inches at X feet? > > And I have noticed mast pumping at the docks and at anchor when the breeze > pipes up. Will that be impossible to eliminate as long as there is a > foresail furled around the forestay? > > And this is what happens to a sailor, unable to fall back to sleep > after waking in the middle of the night, who is contemplating taking a 41 > year old boat offshore. > > Reggie > CAL Cruising 36 "Submit" > > > > > > > > > > > >