Best way to lower mast on Cape Dory 25

[alambertfl]

As a follow up, I did it the way I thought I was going to have to do it. I found a couple of other guys at the yard(remember the boat is on the hard) to help me. I threw a line around the spreaders, tied bowlines in each end and attached both ends to to a separate line that I attached to the hitch ball on my pick up truck parked in front of the bow. Also constructed the 8 ft. crutch, the plywood v on an 8 ft. 2 x 4. Had two guys on deck to help guide the mast down. We disengaged the forestay, the spreader side stays and slowly let the mast down with the looped line around the spreaders. It came down into the crutch without incident. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. The next time I will know more about how to do it thanks to all of you. I really liked the video on the Catalina 35 mast stepping and will most likely try that approach in the future. Thanks again to all of you for your helpful suggestions.

[alambertfl]

As a follow up, I did it the way I thought I was going to have to do it. I found a couple of other guys at the yard(remember the boat is on the hard) to help me. I threw a line around the spreaders, tied bowlines in each end and attached both ends to to a separate line that I attached to the hitch ball on my pick up truck parked in front of the bow. Also constructed the 8 ft. crutch, the plywood v on an 8 ft. 2 x 4. Had two guys on deck to help guide the mast down. We disengaged the forestay, the spreader side stays and slowly let the mast down with the looped line around the spreaders. It came down into the crutch without incident. It wasn't pretty, but it worked. The next time I will know more about how to do it thanks to all of you. I really liked the video on the Catalina 35 mast stepping and will most likely try that approach in the future. Thanks again to all of you for your helpful suggestions.

[Oswego John]

If you have a hinged base on your mast, it is a good idea to provide lateral support to keep the mast in line when it is dropping.

What I have generally done is to undo all of the shrouds on each side except one. I slack off, but still keep attached the shroud that is closest in line or slightly abaft of the mast.

A loose shroud on either side prevents the mast from skewing to one side or the other and possibly cracking or ripping the tabernacle loose.

Considering the leverage that a lengthy mast provides, it is difficult to control it if it gets away. It is safer to keep the mast tip under control.

New Years greetings,
O J

[riveredge]

I released only the forward shrouds. The mast won't come down otherwise. I loosened the turnbuckles on but didn't detach the center ones that use the spreaders. I think they provide the most lateral support. I left the rearmost shrouds attached even though I think they provide less lateral support as the mast comes down.

[Oswego John]

You are correct. When lowering the mast to the stern, any shroud foreward of the mast's lateral plane will tighten and thus prevent the mast from lowering. Any shroud aft of the mast plane will loosen. In theory, any shroud in line with the mast will remain to the same degree of tautness whether the maist is up or down.

This is vice versa when lowering the mast to the bow. The main thought is to maintain control of the direction of fall when lowering (and raising) the mast by hand.

Best wishes. Think spring,

O J

[riveredge]

Thanks, Oswego John. You've confirmed what I figgered. BTW I never heard of a CD 85D. Is that an 85'-long custom boat, a typo or what?

[Oswego John]

Hi riveredge,

Okay you've got me. I'll confess. But first, you have to realize that there might be a little whimsey or tongue in cheek involved.

In 1987, a group of old coots made plans to build a boat for ourselves. We shopped around and with due diligence, came up with the idea to buils a two masted schooner that was common with carrying freight on the Great laked in the 19th century.

Common sense (with a little urging from the USCG) overcame the purism in us and we opted to install a Diesel engine in its bowels.
Other than that, she is pretty much the same as a sailing ship that plied the Great Lakes during the 1800s. Hence the "D" in our 85' long ship which is named OMF Ontario. Did I mention that she is Hull #1

Since she isn't a production bleach bottle boat, and since imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and since we had no normal name to signify the manufacturer of note, and since she is 85' in length to the tip of her bowsprit, we pretend that the Ontario is Cape Dory 85D hull #1

Let me pore through my shoe box file of photos and see if I'm lucky enough to send you a picture of her under full sail.

Thanks for asking about her. (Read thanks for an opportunity for a bit of bragging about our old girl).

O J

Hi riveredge,

Okay you've got me. I'll confess. But first, you have to realize that there might be a little whimsey or tongue in cheek involved.

In 1987, a group of old coots made plans to build a boat for ourselves. We shopped around and with due diligence, came up with the idea to build a two masted schooner that was common with carrying freight on the Great Lakes in the 19th century.

Common sense (with a little urging from the USCG) overcame the purism in us and we opted to install a Diesel engine in its bowels.
Other than that, she is pretty much the same as a sailing ship that plied the Great Lakes during the 1800s. Hence the "D" in our 85' long ship which is named OMF Ontario. Did I mention that she is Hull #1

Since she isn't a production bleach bottle boat, and since imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and since we had no normal name to signify the manufacturer of note, and since she is 85' in length to the tip of her bowsprit, we pretend that the Ontario is Cape Dory 85D hull #1

Let me pore through my shoe box file of photos and see if I'm lucky enough to send you a picture of her under full sail.

Thanks for asking about her. (Read thanks for an opportunity for a bit of bragging about our old girl).

O J

[riveredge]

That is a spectacular ship! I bet the powers that be up at Robinhood won't quibble with you about the name. Now I've done a little cyber sloothing and see that OMF stands for Oswego Maritime Foundation. Never mind Niagara Falls! Maybe I'll visit Oswego next summer.

[moctrams]

Would it not be more acceptable to replace the word “cootâ€

[Duncan]

I released only the forward shrouds. The mast won't come down otherwise. I loosened the turnbuckles on but didn't detach the center ones that use the spreaders. I think they provide the most lateral support. I left the rearmost shrouds attached even though I think they provide less lateral support as the mast comes down.

I agree with everything you say, and I would add that the person steadying the mast at the base is most important of all. The shrouds provide a decent back-up, but they control mostly the top of the mast.

Controlling at the base is the key to safely lowering the mast.

[Neil Gordon]

>>... and since she is 85' in length to the tip of her bowsprit, ...<<

Hmmm... I'm thinking that the CD28's about 28' EXCLUDES the bowsprit (except, of course, when the marina is charging by the foot).

Is OJ practicing a bit of "enhancement" here?

[Jim Davis]

You are showing your age.

But you are right about LOA being the length of the hull itself. Properly speaking OJ should have used "Sparred Length". In my case I use my LOD of 35 feet if picking up a mooring, but for a slip or laying along side I use my sparred length of 45 feet. Not that I'm being cheap, but if I'm actually using valuable space I want to pay the right price. Also I hate to take any chances with the appendages hanging out in traffic. In today's world the distinction between LOA and sparred length are disappearing, perhaps the youngsters are forgetting some of the traditional things .

[Oswego John]

Sheesh. Gimme a break. A guy can't get away with anything around here.

There is an interesting "fact", if you will, on bowsprit length. On multi masted sailing hulls, i.e., schooners, clipper ships and square riggers,etc. there is a not so rigid rule of thumb correlating sail area, the number of foresails, length of hull at water line and the percentage of the length of the bowsprit to the overall length of the ship.

So get out your scale rule and derive your own equasion. If you search, the ratio is quite apparent.

As for the answer, my lips are sealed.
O J