Dual Headstays

[Jack Jamison]

I sail a CD28 with a club-footed jib and I’m about to take on a partner. He would like roller furling and has no interest in the club footed jib while I like the self tacking jib and am loath to spend the money for roller furling and new sail.

I’m considering re-rigging with dual headstays and selling him on the advantages.
 I expect to be able to have both my genny and jib hanked on while flying only one of them. A sail change could be done very quickly and easily.
 I also expect to be able to fly both (with main doused) while running.
 Finally, I expect this will cost less than $500 if we do it ourselves.

Does anyone have any experience or comments?

TIA,
Jack
Sea Belle, Rockland ME



jjjinc@worldpath.net

[Bill]

Hi Jack

I have consider this move as well. I have read some positive comments in some book somewhere (maybe the Pardey's) and look forward to seeing others comments comments as well.

Fair winds

Bill
(the Non-Mac using Non-Member of the NE Fleet Naval Intelligence team)



cd25d@clnk.com

[michael phillips]

KAYLA has just such a rig. The inner headstay has a pelican attachment that makes setup and removal quite easy. The link shows a picture of her (oversize) bowsprit. If interested, I can set the stay and take another shot tomorrow to show the pelican.

Using this to set a hankon 155% drifter is the primary reason KAYLA won the non-spin class in last years Lorillard-Kent! 94 mile offshore race with extremely light wind for the first 9 hours. It never hurts to have options!

-michael
s/v KAYLA
CD28 #318
Niceville FL




KAYLA's bowsprit
michael@bbsc.com

[Gary L.]

Jack,

While I do not have experience with dual headstays, I have seen pictures in sailing mags with them. Usually they were arranged with the headstays side by side, with maybe an inch or so between them. I have also seen pictures of this rig with twin jibs or gennies with whisker poles sailing wing on wing. I am sure that someone must be able to figure out what hardware you would need to accomplish this feat. Off hand, I would say that you might need to move your present deck plate and add another. Likewise to where your forestay attaches to the mast. But, like Bill stated, there are books around to research the work.

Hope this helps,

Gary Lapine
Red Witch III
CD30C, #339
Mattapoisett MA

I sail a CD28 with a club-footed jib and I¡¦m about to take on a partner. He would like roller furling and has no interest in the club footed jib while I like the self tacking jib and am loath to spend the money for roller furling and new sail.

I¡¦m considering re-rigging with dual headstays and selling him on the advantages.
„h I expect to be able to have both my genny and jib hanked on while flying only one of them. A sail change could be done very quickly and easily.
„h I also expect to be able to fly both (with main doused) while running.
„h Finally, I expect this will cost less than $500 if we do it ourselves.

Does anyone have any experience or comments?

TIA,
Jack
Sea Belle, Rockland ME

dory26@attbi.com

[michael phillips]

Attempting to do side-by-side dual headstays would be darn near impossible as the reason they were wanted was to have roller furling on the primary stay. The drum would eliminate any chance having them close to each other. This is why KAYLA's secondary headstay is a little aft, attached lower on the mast of the primary and is detached unless in use.

-michael
s/v KAYLA
CD28 #318
Niceville FL

Jack,

While I do not have experience with dual headstays, I have seen pictures in sailing mags with them. Usually they were arranged with the headstays side by side, with maybe an inch or so between them. I have also seen pictures of this rig with twin jibs or gennies with whisker poles sailing wing on wing. I am sure that someone must be able to figure out what hardware you would need to accomplish this feat. Off hand, I would say that you might need to move your present deck plate and add another. Likewise to where your forestay attaches to the mast. But, like Bill stated, there are books around to research the work.

Hope this helps,

Gary Lapine
Red Witch III
CD30C, #339
Mattapoisett MA

I sail a CD28 with a club-footed jib and I¡¦m about to take on a partner. He would like roller furling and has no interest in the club footed jib while I like the self tacking jib and am loath to spend the money for roller furling and new sail.

I¡¦m considering re-rigging with dual headstays and selling him on the advantages.
„h I expect to be able to have both my genny and jib hanked on while flying only one of them. A sail change could be done very quickly and easily.
„h I also expect to be able to fly both (with main doused) while running.
„h Finally, I expect this will cost less than $500 if we do it ourselves.

Does anyone have any experience or comments?

TIA,
Jack
Sea Belle, Rockland ME

michael@sv-KAYLA.org

[Larry DeMers]

I have been talking with a N.A. regarding dual headstays, and the impact on the boat. I have a removeable dual headstay rigged also, just for clarity.
The problem I see is this..and the N.A. agrees. When two headstays are mounted and tensioned, you either make each stay take half the load of a single stay, or you tighten both stays to the same tension. Immediately, this effects the backstay tension, by doubling it. That will take a stay tension of say 10% (of breaking strength) and double it to 20%, and that is not a good thing, as the stay has less reserve left. Also the down ward compression on the mast doubles when two forestays are fully tensioned.
So the solution seems to be to put 1/2 the normal tension on each stay..but then we run into the other problem..headstay sag under load.
the reasoning for using a second headstay is to allow a quick change from genoa to a higher wind sail (yankee or even storm jib). That implies much higher wind pressure, so a sagging stay would be really detrimental to pointing ability and performance.

I have read a bit about using a triangular plate at the top end of the forestays, with the two stays attaching to holes in the two bottom corners of the triangular plate, and the top hole attaching to the mast tang. This will equalize the loading somewhat, but....

So the point of my message; What is the best way to attach a second forestay? Seems every method is a real compromise..involving adding running backstays even, to counteract the additional tension of the second stay.

What do you all think?


Cheers,

Larry DeMers
s/v DeLaMer
Cape Dory 30 Lake Superior

Attempting to do side-by-side dual headstays would be darn near impossible as the reason they were wanted was to have roller furling on the primary stay. The drum would eliminate any chance having them close to each other. This is why KAYLA's secondary headstay is a little aft, attached lower on the mast of the primary and is detached unless in use.

-michael
s/v KAYLA
CD28 #318
Niceville FL

Jack,

While I do not have experience with dual headstays, I have seen pictures in sailing mags with them. Usually they were arranged with the headstays side by side, with maybe an inch or so between them. I have also seen pictures of this rig with twin jibs or gennies with whisker poles sailing wing on wing. I am sure that someone must be able to figure out what hardware you would need to accomplish this feat. Off hand, I would say that you might need to move your present deck plate and add another. Likewise to where your forestay attaches to the mast. But, like Bill stated, there are books around to research the work.

Hope this helps,

Gary Lapine
Red Witch III
CD30C, #339
Mattapoisett MA

I sail a CD28 with a club-footed jib and I¡¦m about to take on a partner. He would like roller furling and has no interest in the club footed jib while I like the self tacking jib and am loath to spend the money for roller furling and new sail.

I¡¦m considering re-rigging with dual headstays and selling him on the advantages.
?h I expect to be able to have both my genny and jib hanked on while flying only one of them. A sail change could be done very quickly and easily.
?h I also expect to be able to fly both (with main doused) while running.
?h Finally, I expect this will cost less than $500 if we do it ourselves.

Does anyone have any experience or comments?

TIA,
Jack
Sea Belle, Rockland ME

demers@sgi.com

[john vigor]

Larry, I had a C&C 28 IOR offshore racer that had twin headstays set up almost as you mentioned. The tang at the mast head was attached to an upright triangle of stainless steel plate. From the two bottom corners, twin stainless steel stays of exactly the same length led down to another upside-down triangle of stainless steel. The bottom point of the triangle was attached to the usual single turnbuckle and the headstay fitting.

As this system is self-contained and self leveling, I can't imagine that it adds any more stress than a single stay would. You have to make sure the stays are far enough apart, so that your jib hanks don't hang up on each other, but otherwise I can see no problems. Mine were a little less than 2 inches apart, if I remember correctly, and they lined up athwartships, of course, not fore-and-aft. I certainly didn't have any problems with them.

Cheers,

John V.
CD27 "Sangoma"
Bellingham, WA




jvigorNOSPAM@earthlink.net

[Ken Coit]

John,

Did you tension the dual headstays to half the usual tension or double the tension on the backstay? Seems to me that there would be more sag if you didn't double the tension on the backstay, but maybe the design tension on a single headstay is such that half as much doesn't contribute much sag.

Thanks in advance for your wisdom.

Keep on sailing,

Ken Coit, ND7N
Avon Rollaway
Ugly French inflatable
CD/14 #538
Grady White 204C
CD/36 #84 Parfait
Hailing Port: Raleigh, NC
Sailing from: Havelock, NC

Larry, I had a C&C 28 IOR offshore racer that had twin headstays set up almost as you mentioned. The tang at the mast head was attached to an upright triangle of stainless steel plate. From the two bottom corners, twin stainless steel stays of exactly the same length led down to another upside-down triangle of stainless steel. The bottom point of the triangle was attached to the usual single turnbuckle and the headstay fitting.

As this system is self-contained and self leveling, I can't imagine that it adds any more stress than a single stay would. You have to make sure the stays are far enough apart, so that your jib hanks don't hang up on each other, but otherwise I can see no problems. Mine were a little less than 2 inches apart, if I remember correctly, and they lined up athwartships, of course, not fore-and-aft. I certainly didn't have any problems with them.

Cheers,

John V.
CD27 "Sangoma"
Bellingham, WA

parfaitNOSPAM@nc.rr.com

[john vigor]

Ken, As far as I remember, I tensioned only the backstay to the correct tension for a single headstay, and I let the twin jibstays sort themselves out. To tell you the truth, in my racing days I was always more concerned with the tension of the jib luff than the tension of the stay it flew from, and the halyard tension was tweaked constantly to give the right sail shape for the conditions. Of course, the jibs I used had wire luffs. The stays were really just backups.

Cheers,

John V.

John,

Did you tension the dual headstays to half the usual tension or double the tension on the backstay? Seems to me that there would be more sag if you didn't double the tension on the backstay, but maybe the design tension on a single headstay is such that half as much doesn't contribute much sag.

Thanks in advance for your wisdom.

Keep on sailing,

Ken Coit, ND7N
Avon Rollaway
Ugly French inflatable
CD/14 #538
Grady White 204C
CD/36 #84 Parfait
Hailing Port: Raleigh, NC
Sailing from: Havelock, NC

jvigorNOSPAM@earthlink.net

[Ken Coit]

John,

So I guess that translates as follows:

The rigging was set up as usual to support the mast, but sailing luff tension (and thus, backstay tension) was determined by luffwire e.g., we really didn't know what the backstay tension was when we were racing. Nothing broke, so it was OK.

Sounds reasonable, but if you were flying two headsails simultaneously, I'll bet the backstay tension was doubled over the norm or the luffs sagged.

Ken

Ken, As far as I remember, I tensioned only the backstay to the correct tension for a single headstay, and I let the twin jibstays sort themselves out. To tell you the truth, in my racing days I was always more concerned with the tension of the jib luff than the tension of the stay it flew from, and the halyard tension was tweaked constantly to give the right sail shape for the conditions. Of course, the jibs I used had wire luffs. The stays were really just backups.

Cheers,

John V.

John,

Did you tension the dual headstays to half the usual tension or double the tension on the backstay? Seems to me that there would be more sag if you didn't double the tension on the backstay, but maybe the design tension on a single headstay is such that half as much doesn't contribute much sag.

Thanks in advance for your wisdom.

Keep on sailing,

Ken Coit, ND7N
Avon Rollaway
Ugly French inflatable
CD/14 #538
Grady White 204C
CD/36 #84 Parfait
Hailing Port: Raleigh, NC
Sailing from: Havelock, NC

parfaitNOSPAM@nc.rr.com

[john vigor]

Ken, yes that's about right. But we never worried about breaking a backstay. A backstay always carries much less tension than the forestay because of the greater angle it makes with the mast, as I'm sure you know. We never flew two headsails simultaneously. We used the twin stays only to raise a new jib while the old one was still working. As soon as the new jib was sheeted home, we hauled down the first one, so the stress was on two stays only for brief periods. I think you're right when you say the luffs would sag, and on cruising boats using poled out twin jibs, goosewinged downwind, they certainly do, but it doesn't matter then. In fact, it's probably beneficial because it gives lift.

John V

John,

So I guess that translates as follows:

The rigging was set up as usual to support the mast, but sailing luff tension (and thus, backstay tension) was determined by luffwire e.g., we really didn't know what the backstay tension was when we were racing. Nothing broke, so it was OK.

Sounds reasonable, but if you were flying two headsails simultaneously, I'll bet the backstay tension was doubled over the norm or the luffs sagged.

Ken

jvigorNOSPAM@earthlink.net

[Larry Demers]

John,

I have been monkeying around with a vector analysis of the forces when two forestays are present, and if the two headstays are properly tensioned to prevent sagging of the stay under load, and assuming that this tension level is the same as when there is only a single headstay present, the tension on the backstay exactly doubles. The compression on the mast doubles also. No sail on the stays here..only rigging tension. Under sail, the compression loads would increase of course, as would backstay tensions. Thus my worry as I have this system in place now, although I use individual tangs for attachment of the two forestays at the mast head (I like the redundancy of two forestays and two separate attachment points, should one fail).
My gut tells me that two headstays tensioned the same is a problem on my boat anyway, and that the backstay may need to be increased in size to accomodate the tension range so that it falls in the "less than 10% of breaking strength" range, which is the right static tension to have..max.

What advantage do the triangular pieces provide? On paper, they look like they are intended to equalize tensions somehow. But I don't see how they do this very well, and from my limited use of our twin headstays, I think the separated stays operate ok as is, without the equalizing functions..but then I don't have any experience with the later. What is the difference here? Something is bothering me about this arrangement..but cannot put a finger on it. (Maybe it's lack of sailing that is giving me the worries here..)?

Cheers,

Larry DeMers
s/v DeLaMer
CD30 Lake Superior

Larry, I had a C&C 28 IOR offshore racer that had twin headstays set up almost as you mentioned. The tang at the mast head was attached to an upright triangle of stainless steel plate. From the two bottom corners, twin stainless steel stays of exactly the same length led down to another upside-down triangle of stainless steel. The bottom point of the triangle was attached to the usual single turnbuckle and the headstay fitting.

As this system is self-contained and self leveling, I can't imagine that it adds any more stress than a single stay would. You have to make sure the stays are far enough apart, so that your jib hanks don't hang up on each other, but otherwise I can see no problems. Mine were a little less than 2 inches apart, if I remember correctly, and they lined up athwartships, of course, not fore-and-aft. I certainly didn't have any problems with them.

Cheers,

John V.
CD27 "Sangoma"
Bellingham, WA

demers@sgi.com

[Ken Coit]

Larry,

Vector analysis! Those were the days....

The equalizer does just that; in addition, the dual headstay provides redundancy, but only if the headstays are of the same wire as the original; you also have to consider that you have added more points of potential failure, so you probably would really want to beef up the hardware. If you tension both headstays to 10%, the backstay is tensioned to 20% as you say, and the hull?? You are trying to pull the ends together and drive the mast down through the middle. Does the furniture squeak? Do the doors and drawers still work? I think John said in an earlier post that he tensioned the dual headstays to 1/2 each and let them sag if they do, using the wire luff as the real support for the sail, not the headstay at all.

Pray for Spring, it is bound to work,

Ken

John,

I have been monkeying around with a vector analysis of the forces when two forestays are present, and if the two headstays are properly tensioned to prevent sagging of the stay under load, and assuming that this tension level is the same as when there is only a single headstay present, the tension on the backstay exactly doubles. The compression on the mast doubles also. No sail on the stays here..only rigging tension. Under sail, the compression loads would increase of course, as would backstay tensions. Thus my worry as I have this system in place now, although I use individual tangs for attachment of the two forestays at the mast head (I like the redundancy of two forestays and two separate attachment points, should one fail).
My gut tells me that two headstays tensioned the same is a problem on my boat anyway, and that the backstay may need to be increased in size to accomodate the tension range so that it falls in the "less than 10% of breaking strength" range, which is the right static tension to have..max.

What advantage do the triangular pieces provide? On paper, they look like they are intended to equalize tensions somehow. But I don't see how they do this very well, and from my limited use of our twin headstays, I think the separated stays operate ok as is, without the equalizing functions..but then I don't have any experience with the later. What is the difference here? Something is bothering me about this arrangement..but cannot put a finger on it. (Maybe it's lack of sailing that is giving me the worries here..)?

Cheers,

Larry DeMers
s/v DeLaMer
CD30 Lake Superior

Larry, I had a C&C 28 IOR offshore racer that had twin headstays set up almost as you mentioned. The tang at the mast head was attached to an upright triangle of stainless steel plate. From the two bottom corners, twin stainless steel stays of exactly the same length led down to another upside-down triangle of stainless steel. The bottom point of the triangle was attached to the usual single turnbuckle and the headstay fitting.

As this system is self-contained and self leveling, I can't imagine that it adds any more stress than a single stay would. You have to make sure the stays are far enough apart, so that your jib hanks don't hang up on each other, but otherwise I can see no problems. Mine were a little less than 2 inches apart, if I remember correctly, and they lined up athwartships, of course, not fore-and-aft. I certainly didn't have any problems with them.

Cheers,

John V.
CD27 "Sangoma"
Bellingham, WA

parfaitNOSPAM@nc.rr.com

[john vigor]

Larry, you are far more knowledgeable about these things than I, but let me play devil's advocate for a moment. The system I had on my C&C 28 was a parallelogram--two parallel wires attached to swiveling plates top and bottom. The plates were then attached to the mast and the stemhead by a single attachment. It was like a normal forestay, but with two separate strands.

Thus, one of the forestays couldn't stretch without stretching the other. So the total effect was the same as trying to stretch a single forestay.

No more tension than normal was needed in the twin forestay combination than would have been needed in a single stay. Imagine if you have a forestay of three-strand cable, and you change it for another of four-strand cable. There is no additional tension on the stays or the mast--the load is simply shared among more strands. That's the principle of the twin stays I've described. If you have two separate stays, attached separately to the hull, then yes, the stresses will be doubled all round. But this wasn't like that.

I think if you examine the twin stays I've described, you'll find that your fears of sagging might be misplaced. But I must confess I never even thought of that at the time I had the boat, because, as I've already mentioned, it wasn't the stays that took the sag out of the foresail, it was the wire jib luff that kept it nice and tight, via a wire halyard and a mast winch.

Incidentally, both of the stays were the size you'd expect a single wire to be--they weren't half the normal size. I don't know if this system was devised by the boffins at C&C or if it was a later addition, but it certainly wasn't unique. A lot of racing boats used it at the time, and there were no adverse reports that I was aware of.

The function of the triangular pieces was to even out the tension in each stay, as you surmised. You can't stretch one without stretching the other the same amount. It seems to be an automatic anti-sag device, and if the wires are robust enought--full size, as I said--there should be no sagging problem. Or no more than usual, anyway. And the tensions will be no greater on the mast or backstay than normal.

Try this: draw a coat hanger right way up. From points near the two lower outside edges let two parallel lines drop to another coat hanger that is upside down. Let these lines join the upside down coat hanger in the same relative positions as those above. The coat hangers are actually isosceles triangles, and each of the three attachment points in each triangle is able to swivel. The single attachment at the top goes to a mast tang. The single attachment at the bottom goes to a stemhead fitting.

Happy vectoring!

John V.

John,

I have been monkeying around with a vector analysis of the forces when two forestays are present, and if the two headstays are properly tensioned to prevent sagging of the stay under load, and assuming that this tension level is the same as when there is only a single headstay present, the tension on the backstay exactly doubles. The compression on the mast doubles also. No sail on the stays here..only rigging tension. Under sail, the compression loads would increase of course, as would backstay tensions. Thus my worry as I have this system in place now, although I use individual tangs for attachment of the two forestays at the mast head (I like the redundancy of two forestays and two separate attachment points, should one fail).
My gut tells me that two headstays tensioned the same is a problem on my boat anyway, and that the backstay may need to be increased in size to accomodate the tension range so that it falls in the "less than 10% of breaking strength" range, which is the right static tension to have..max.

What advantage do the triangular pieces provide? On paper, they look like they are intended to equalize tensions somehow. But I don't see how they do this very well, and from my limited use of our twin headstays, I think the separated stays operate ok as is, without the equalizing functions..but then I don't have any experience with the later. What is the difference here? Something is bothering me about this arrangement..but cannot put a finger on it. (Maybe it's lack of sailing that is giving me the worries here..)?

Cheers,

Larry DeMers
s/v DeLaMer
CD30 Lake Superior

jvigorNOSPAM@earthlink.net

[Ken Coit]

Always did wonder where you boaters with dogs kept the hounds; now I know!

I offer nothing about the web site below except that it looks pretty serious and may explain why we didn't finish up front very often.

Keep on sailing,

Ken Coit, ND7N
Avon Rollaway
Ugly French inflatable
CD/14 #538
Grady White 204C “Joseph Burnham”
CD/36 #84 “Parfait”
Hailing Port: Raleigh, NC
Sailing from: Havelock, NC

Larry, you are far more knowledgeable about these things than I, but let me play devil's advocate for a moment. The system I had on my C&C 28 was a parallelogram--two parallel wires attached to swiveling plates top and bottom. The plates were then attached to the mast and the stemhead by a single attachment. It was like a normal forestay, but with two separate strands.

Thus, one of the forestays couldn't stretch without stretching the other. So the total effect was the same as trying to stretch a single forestay.

No more tension than normal was needed in the twin forestay combination than would have been needed in a single stay. Imagine if you have a forestay of three-strand cable, and you change it for another of four-strand cable. There is no additional tension on the stays or the mast--the load is simply shared among more strands. That's the principle of the twin stays I've described. If you have two separate stays, attached separately to the hull, then yes, the stresses will be doubled all round. But this wasn't like that.

I think if you examine the twin stays I've described, you'll find that your fears of sagging might be misplaced. But I must confess I never even thought of that at the time I had the boat, because, as I've already mentioned, it wasn't the stays that took the sag out of the foresail, it was the wire jib luff that kept it nice and tight, via a wire halyard and a mast winch.

Incidentally, both of the stays were the size you'd expect a single wire to be--they weren't half the normal size. I don't know if this system was devised by the boffins at C&C or if it was a later addition, but it certainly wasn't unique. A lot of racing boats used it at the time, and there were no adverse reports that I was aware of.

The function of the triangular pieces was to even out the tension in each stay, as you surmised. You can't stretch one without stretching the other the same amount. It seems to be an automatic anti-sag device, and if the wires are robust enought--full size, as I said--there should be no sagging problem. Or no more than usual, anyway. And the tensions will be no greater on the mast or backstay than normal.

Try this: draw a coat hanger right way up. From points near the two lower outside edges let two parallel lines drop to another coat hanger that is upside down. Let these lines join the upside down coat hanger in the same relative positions as those above. The coat hangers are actually isosceles triangles, and each of the three attachment points in each triangle is able to swivel. The single attachment at the top goes to a mast tang. The single attachment at the bottom goes to a stemhead fitting.

Happy vectoring!

John V.

John,

I have been monkeying around with a vector analysis of the forces when two forestays are present, and if the two headstays are properly tensioned to prevent sagging of the stay under load, and assuming that this tension level is the same as when there is only a single headstay present, the tension on the backstay exactly doubles. The compression on the mast doubles also. No sail on the stays here..only rigging tension. Under sail, the compression loads would increase of course, as would backstay tensions. Thus my worry as I have this system in place now, although I use individual tangs for attachment of the two forestays at the mast head (I like the redundancy of two forestays and two separate attachment points, should one fail).
My gut tells me that two headstays tensioned the same is a problem on my boat anyway, and that the backstay may need to be increased in size to accomodate the tension range so that it falls in the "less than 10% of breaking strength" range, which is the right static tension to have..max.

What advantage do the triangular pieces provide? On paper, they look like they are intended to equalize tensions somehow. But I don't see how they do this very well, and from my limited use of our twin headstays, I think the separated stays operate ok as is, without the equalizing functions..but then I don't have any experience with the later. What is the difference here? Something is bothering me about this arrangement..but cannot put a finger on it. (Maybe it's lack of sailing that is giving me the worries here..)?

Cheers,

Larry DeMers
s/v DeLaMer
CD30 Lake Superior

Technical Analysis of Esoteric Stuff re: Stay Sag
[img]http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepage ... ibStay.gif[/img]
parfaitNOSPAM@nc.rr.com