Need Help with Windlass Application

I am new to the Trawler workd with the recent purchase of our first one being a 32' Monterey Clipper. * I am in the process of installing a mast for radar and paravane stabilizers. *I will be lowering the mast aft with a tabernackle setup about 30 degrees to be able to pass under bridges while leaving and coming back to port. *My plan is to use a anchor windlass to lower and raise the mast. *I would like to use a Manual Windlass like the lawrence seatiger 555 or 308 goiliti. *Because I am not familiar with windlass operations...Would the manual windlass be able to work in both directions (anchoring, lowering, and raising the mast)?*

Thanks for your Help


Mark

Could you not just use a sailing winch if you are going to keep things Manual? Just an ignorant question as I do not exactly understand your intent.

How are you going to lower a mast with the booms of the paravanes attached? That's a lot of hardware for a 32' but explain more so we can understand. I for one, am rather slow.

The paravanes will be removed and only installed right before deployment. *Everything is in the design stage on that end....I have thought of the sailboat winch, however, I am wanting a anchor windlass also. *I have a bridge so the angle will be offset with a block and tackle installed on the bridge. *I assume there will be much stress on the block and tackle and it will have to be reinforced greatly since the mast weighs around 200lbs. *It is made out of 4" stainless. * I will have a stanchion installed in the cockpit to support the weight when lowered. *One concern I have is raising my center of gravity. *However, I plan on putting genset down in the bilge so it seems that would offset the height/weight of the mast. The mast is 14' 6" tall...so that puts my clearance at 16' over all and I am needing around 13' for the bridges @ high tide. * Thanks for the input any ideas or constructive criticism would be appreciated.

Mark

Mark, how are you going to get the necessary leverage?* On my pocket cutter, the boom was used.* The boom had a topping lift connecting the*end of the boom to the top of the mast.* The line (the mainsheet with its*blocks)*hoisting/lowering the mast was connected to the end of the boom.

My builder says the Coot's mast can be lowered/raised by two people without special equipment (winches, etc.).* The rig is boomless.* But I wouldn't want to do it frequently because some stays would need to be loosened/disconnected.


(Somebody else's*Coot.)


-- Edited by markpierce on Saturday 8th of January 2011 02:53:34 PM

phishown wrote:

The paravanes will be removed and only installed right before deployment. *Everything is in the design stage on that end....I have thought of the sailboat winch, however, I am wanting a anchor windlass also. *I have a bridge so the angle will be offset with a block and tackle installed on the bridge. *I assume there will be much stress on the block and tackle and it will have to be reinforced greatly since the mast weighs around 200lbs. *It is made out of 4" stainless. * I will have a stanchion installed in the cockpit to support the weight when lowered. *One concern I have is raising my center of gravity. *However, I plan on putting genset down in the bilge so it seems that would offset the height/weight of the mast. The mast is 14' 6" tall...so that puts my clearance at 16' over all and I am needing around 13' for the bridges @ high tide. * Thanks for the input any ideas or constructive criticism would be appreciated.


Mark

*

Click to expand...

Wow, a stainless mast. That seems like an awful lot of weight up there, so my concern would be how stable *the boat would be when *hit with an errant wave (i.e., when the paravanes aren't deployed). Plus a lot of mass to handle.*What is your beam?

*

If I am only lowering the mast around 30 degrees each time to achieve the 3 additional feet of clearance I would think that the leverage wouldn't be an issue. I could see if I were to lower all the way down each time. Even then with the block and tackle being on the bridge (lifting point) 8.5' above the tabernackle base that I assume would be enough leverage to lift from laying completely down. I have even thought of having the top break down 4' from the top with a hinge but then there is wiring to deal with.

Mark

I am concerned with the weight, however, With all the cobia towers I have fished out of with 3-4 people hanging out of them 12' - 18' above the water and averaging 200lbs a body and being in rough conditions I have seen how suspended weight can make a boat roll. We are really only talking 40-60lbs in the air with a majority of the weight being lower and pushed down on the deck. Maybe I am being too optimistic.

Mark

phishown,
What a pleasant supprise. Someone's on the forum w a boat remarkebly like my Willy.
Mark, Willy is for Willard. Willy is in my avitar. There is a photo thread (top of gen disc).
There's a member album too. I of course want to know all about the Clipper and see many photos. Willy had a fly bridge too at one time but a previous owner removed it.
Welcome to the forum.

Eric Henning
Willard 30 Nomad
Thorne Bay
Alaska

If it is "just" to raise and lower the mast how about a boat trailer winch. I just bought a Fulton 1100 lb capacity for $41.00, ratchet locks in either direction. Zinc coated I figure it will rust after a couple of years and I'll get a new one. A 2500 lb will cost about 75.00
Steve W.

Change your mast to aluminum. Then you can lower and raise it unassisted.
Mine is a 3" aluminum tubing, with spreaders, lights, radar and boom and I lower it by attaching a line to the underside of the radar and lowering away from the flybridge. One part tackle. I have to brace myself when it gets down 8 ft or so, but if you are only going down 3 feet you won't get to that. I rest mine on a 2 legged aluminum brace that I attach just above the gooseneck, straddles the boom, and gives good support when it lands on the deck.
You need to do something else with the paravanes. Maybe they can lay down on the deck first.
Then you can get an anchor winch that is just for the anchor.

I have already purchased the mast and cut most of the hardware and downsized it by 6' to fit. I will take some pics of the base/tabernackle along with the mast.

I wanted a canoe stern trawler...and narrowed my options to the monterey clipper, willards and fales. I lucked up and found a monterey clipper in Florida. I just spent 3 months painting the entire boat with awlgrip. Now it is time to start rigging. I will post pics.

Mark

"I wanted a canoe stern trawler"

Looks over performance?

-- Edited by FF on Monday 10th of January 2011 05:20:17 AM

I'm not sure the advantages of a square stern are that much more....Without opening a can of worms. The 2 pros to have a square stern would be less drag (less fuel burn) I'm only burning 1.5 gallons an hour @ 8 knots so that's not an issue. And Stability....Now that is an issue hence the paravanes I will be installing. I don't plan on doing much open water travel...Mainly the ICW. As far as the pros to having a round bottom boat are obviously looks, however, when it hits the fan round bottom boat will out perform their flatter versions. The crew will suffer though. In a 32' boat it is all relevant to what you want to do with it and staying inland, cruising, and looking good are my priorities. And Having Fun!

Mark

FF,
You should have used the word speed instead of performance. In fuel burn performance and rough weather performance the canoe stern out performs square stern by a wide margin.
phishown,
"The 2 pros to have a square stern would be less drag (less fuel burn)"
You mean canoe stern*** ...yes?
8 knots? You must have considerable power. What engine do you have?

This last spring I replace the old wood mast and boom with aluminum and used 12 volt 2000 lbs winches with wire remote bought at Harbor fright for about 50 bucks to rain/low the boom and the dink, which is a lot easier and less dangerous then the old hand winches.* I still do not get how you plan on raising and lower the mast and what you are going to attched the winch to?* Where is the mast going to be?

I would agree with Eric's query in that I would expect a round stern to be more efficient than a square one as long as you don't overstep the hull speed bounds. But at 8 knots I think you have exceeded them somewhat. Stability would be more affected by beam, A/B ratio and overall hull shape I would think.

To me the only benefit to a square stern in those speed ranges is the ability to have a stern platform which is so useful for dinghy ingress/egress.

I am planning on using my anchor windlass at the bow.....running the raising/lowering line aft to a lifting halyard block mounted on the top edge of the bridge to compensate for the angle change when lowered. *There will be a stanchion in the cockpit that the mast will rest on when lowered. *Keep in mind it will only be lowered around 30 degrees. *There is a heavy duty tabernackle base that will support the mast along with permanent quick release points on the aft *side of the super structure bulkhead to release the mast for lowering. *Attached is a diagram of placement and pretty close drawing of size and shape of mast on boat. *Pic is from being on the hard 2 months ago before final paint.

My understanding of drag is that when water is moving down the side of a hull and has to change course to the inboard....this creates drag because the flow is changed. *This is my thoughts of a canoe stern having more drag because the water flow is changed creating sideways drag. *On a square stern the waterflow is not interrupted and is continuous.


The power plant I have is 4-236 Perkins 85hp.


Thanks for all your replys!

FF wrote:Looks over performance?

Click to expand...

At less than hull speed the flat stern is draggier. It is the underwater body that matters in any event and phishown's boat could have the stern chopped off or extended to form a flat transom above the waterline and it wouldn't make one bit of difference except for the tailgate effect on air flow.

If you look at commerical ships where low drag and high efficiency are critical they all have 'canoe stern" underbodies. Some have a true canoe stern above the waterline because it looks so good, others are chopped off flat to save weight.

A* quick look at the sailing designs for the past many years shows a trend to flatter sterns, flatter bottoms, spade rudders and less "grabby' keels. All of this allows greater boat speed.

Computer design and tank testing has caused/allowed both MV and SV following these design trends to achieve*greater efficiency and*higher and safer speeds (surfing) in following seas - something that a canoe stern and older design hulls cannot do. For safe blue water passage, the ability to move quickly and efficiently is now commonplace.

It is not uncommon to*see a plush sailing mono hull yacht today that can easily do well above true wind speed as a result of modern hull, sail*and rigging design. AsRickB says, for efficiency below hull speed, canoe sterns are great.

Tom,
Your'e right******** .......for surfing.
But who needs to surf?******* .....planing hulls.

It would seem having two windless one on each side would be better than one that straight.* One on each side would keep the mast from tipping to one side.* The winches I bought have a 6 ft wiring, which you could lengthen and/or modify so one control could power two winches.**And if you have the mast tipped back wards a bit, you would not need a winch to pull it down.**So instead of two fixed forward strays you have two winches that power the stays.* Just a thought.*


-- Edited by Phil Fill on Monday 10th of January 2011 04:01:53 PM

With the Ice and cold we have had here in Pensacola I have taken the day indoors to narrow down the design. I have come to the conclusion that i will simply have 3' of height removed from mast and have it fixed to the bulkhead and floor with no worries of lowering and raising each time I leave port. This will make my wife a happy trawling partner...She will say I will be much more pleasant person to deal with coming and going having to not worry with this issue. It's a win win. Thanks for all or your suggestions. I will take pics when everything is installed.

Mark

phishown wrote:

*I have come to the conclusion that i will simply have 3' of height removed from mast and have it fixed to the bulkhead and floor with no worries of lowering and raising each time I leave port.

Click to expand...

That's a sound decision.* The "pain and suffering" you will avoid*is*significant.

*

"If you look at commerical ships where low drag and high efficiency are critical they all have 'canoe stern" underbodies. "

Indeed, , BUT the commercials operate at basically one speed, are seldom accelerated either by oversized engines or waves astern.

The lower hull speed of a canoe stern can cause the waves to break by adding energy to the wave .

At low SL speeds low wetted area counts far more than stern shape .

At higher speeds the stern shape does count.

Performance has lots of forms, A round stern is fine for turning against pilings , a transom can allow probably 2x the guests aboard than the pointy end.

Performance like beauty is in the mind of the owner.

FF wrote:The lower hull speed of a canoe stern can cause the waves to break by adding energy to the wave .
______________________________________________________________
???????????????* If the waves are breaking, aren't they dissipating energy?

Click to expand...

*

FF,
Depends on the hull in question. Take an old GB. Give it a good full disp stern like a Sharpie sail boat and it would experience a large reduction in drag w the Sharpie stern. But then the GB wasn't designed to go at the low SL ratios I think you had in mind. And I'm sure you're alluding to the rule or fact that at slow speeds surface area drag is higher than wave making friction caused largely by hull shape. Under power at 7 knots the GB 36 does not have an appropriate hull form but the same boat on the face of a breaking sea running an inlet in the nasty has a far better hull form than my Willard. In Willy the breaking sea from astern pushes her beyond her hull speed due to gravity and the steepness of the wave. The "suction" under the pulls her down at the stern and the sea washes over her and whatever happens next could be a good tale without a happy ending. FF says "At low SL speeds low wetted area counts far more than stern shape".
Yes but only at speeds that are appropriate for it's length, displacement and speed.

The main reason boats are "faster" today is size and weight.

The 35 Year issue of Cruising World shows that in the "old days" a heavy boat like a WetSnail 32 was considered the norm. To carry food and water for 2 or 3 for up to 60 days required a heavy displacement boat to carry the load of thousands of pounds.

Today the same mom & pop cruiser will be mid 40's long, and with the same burden the 45 fter can be lighter.

The hulls today are lighter as the builders are willing to go a bit higher tech and resin that was 17c a pound is now 10X that or more for a better grade.

With noisemakers now the norm sophisticated auto pilots can be fed , as the water maker makes 400G a day for our intrepid couple. Lousey unbalance hull shapes can be steered with a good enough auto pilot that is quick and very strong.

In the "old " days the hull shape was REQUIRED to be sweet enough for a self steering to do the helm chores.

Sail cruisers are faster today due to bigger boats are faster than smaller boats , and lighter boats are always easier to stuff thru the water , but "better" would need a daffynition of Better.

FF

Thank*goodness the SV*designers don't listen to you. If they did, we'd still be re-caulking the HMS *Resolution.

The only thing the sailing vessel sellers listen to is the MARKET.

Today folks want roomarans , even in sail , so huge square transoms , "sailing deck houses" and fat boats are in vogue.

Since much of the hull can be rolled out of the water under sail the shape (like an 1860 NY Sandbagger) gets acceptable when well heeled .

Just as in motor boats, the slip is charged for by LOA so a fat hull doesn't cost more to own.