#8182 - 10/28/0912:59 PMSpinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Update
Rhapsody #348
Class Co-President
Registered: 05/21/07
Posts: 1874
Loc: Portsmouth, RI
There is a discussion about spinnaker poles in another thread at at this link where Michael Lusty found in the 2004 rules the requirement for a bridle was added. In 2005 when the class rules were updated to allow carbon poles, the bridal requirement disappeared. Bob Rutsch commented that he did not know if this was intentional, or an inadvertent omission when the rules updates were made.
Here are the applicable paragraphs from the 2004 and 2005 rules:
2004 Rules 5.11 Spinnaker Pole .1 Material shall be of aluminum alloy extrusion and supplied only through a builder approved by the J/30 Class Association. .2 Length from tip to tip of the pole shall not exceed 3810 mm nor when attached to the fitting at the mast, extend more than 3842 mm from the face of the mast. .3 Bridle is required and the material is not restricted. .4 Spinnaker pole end fittings can be of composite material such as the Forespar “ultra” series. A trigger mechanisms for holding the jaws open is not permitted.
2005 Rules & as currently worded in 2009 Rules 5.11 Spinnaker Pole .1 Material shall be of either aluminum alloy extrusion or carbon fiber. The diameter of the an aluminum spinnaker pole shall not be less than 2 7/8 inches and a carbon fiber spinnaker pole shall have a uniform diameter through out of not be less than 2 1/2 inches. .2 Length from tip to tip of the pole shall not exceed 3810 mm nor when attached to the fitting at the mast, extend more than 3842 mm from the face of the mast. .3 Spinnaker pole end fittings can be of composite material such as the Forespar “ultra” series. A trigger mechanisms for holding the jaws open is not permitted.
Would the class measurer please investigate this and report back here? If it was removed intentionally, then the case is closed. If it was inadvertently dropped during the 2005 rules update, we should restore the rule as intended during the next time the rules are updated.
#8183 - 10/28/0903:06 PMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Update
[Re: Rhapsody #348]
Cap'n Vic
Senior Member
Registered: 05/27/07
Posts: 914
Loc: Newport and Naples
While we are at it ... I have a pole that I am converting for Phrf and it has snap on ends. You run the pole end against the ring and the hook pops up and locks ... now is this really different from the lock open? or is the "Lock Open" the only gizmo that is illegal. As I remember the lock open has a trigger to snap it shut once the hook has seated on the mast ring.
Attachments SnapPoleEnd.jpg[26.26 KBytes] - (60 downloads) Description: Pole snap end
#8184 - 10/28/0903:33 PMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Update
[Re: Cap'n Vic]
Bob Rutsch
Governor at Large
Registered: 04/03/00
Posts: 527
Loc: Maryland, USA
The one that locks the pin open and closes it using a trigger was not deemed legal. The other Forespar end has an angled attachment for the trip line that can be pressed against the ring to open and snap the pole in place. This has been successfully measured at various NAs.
#8187 - 10/29/0904:23 PMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Upda
[Re: Rhapsody #348]
dbows
Senior Member
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 650
Loc: Marblehead, MA
Originally Posted By: Rhapsody #348
There is a discussion about spinnaker poles in another thread at at this link where Michael Lusty found in the 2004 rules the requirement for a bridle was added. In 2005 when the class rules were updated to allow carbon poles, the bridal requirement disappeared. Bob Rutsch commented that he did not know if this was intentional, or an inadvertent omission when the rules updates were made.
Here are the applicable paragraphs from the 2004 and 2005 rules:
2004 Rules 5.11 Spinnaker Pole .1 Material shall be of aluminum alloy extrusion and supplied only through a builder approved by the J/30 Class Association. .2 Length from tip to tip of the pole shall not exceed 3810 mm nor when attached to the fitting at the mast, extend more than 3842 mm from the face of the mast. .3 Bridle is required and the material is not restricted. .4 Spinnaker pole end fittings can be of composite material such as the Forespar “ultra” series. A trigger mechanisms for holding the jaws open is not permitted.
2005 Rules & as currently worded in 2009 Rules 5.11 Spinnaker Pole .1 Material shall be of either aluminum alloy extrusion or carbon fiber. The diameter of the an aluminum spinnaker pole shall not be less than 2 7/8 inches and a carbon fiber spinnaker pole shall have a uniform diameter through out of not be less than 2 1/2 inches. .2 Length from tip to tip of the pole shall not exceed 3810 mm nor when attached to the fitting at the mast, extend more than 3842 mm from the face of the mast. .3 Spinnaker pole end fittings can be of composite material such as the Forespar “ultra” series. A trigger mechanisms for holding the jaws open is not permitted.
Would the class measurer please investigate this and report back here? If it was removed intentionally, then the case is closed. If it was inadvertently dropped during the 2005 rules update, we should restore the rule as intended during the next time the rules are updated.
Umm... I bought a pole without a bridal - I checked the rules and noticed it was gone so I figured we had dropped it.
_________________________
David Bows Mallorca - Hull# 397 ~~~~~_/)~_/)~~~~_/)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~
Registered: 08/26/10
Posts: 24
Loc: honeymoon bay b.c.
I have always had spinnaker poles with bridles, and my current boat #394 has bridles on the pole, however I was reading a book by a highly qualified world class racer, and he stated that if you can do away with the bridles do so. Well, I'm always willing to try anything minimalist with regards to race boat rigging and layout so I have re-rigged the pole so that the topping and downhaul both attach at the center of the pole. This all seems logical as the old bridle system was prone to tangling etc. but my new concern is whether the strength of the pole without end mounted bridles will be compromised.
#10417 - 10/29/1009:08 AMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Upda
[Re: Rhapsody #348]
311 Temptation
Western Great Lakes District Governor
Registered: 04/27/04
Posts: 155
Loc: grand rapids, mi
You will snap your pole quickly. Surely not made for use like that.
Normal load in column versus the point load...
To bypass bridles, connect the topping lift & downhaul shackles to the outboard pole ends, same place as the end of the bridles were connected. Once you get rid of your bridles you must dip jibe as you cannot end for end jibe without the bridles. I think the bridles, end for end jibes and single sheets are a total system very well suited to the J/30.
_________________________
Dell Todd #311 Temptation Holland MI
#10418 - 10/29/1010:17 AMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Upda
[Re: 311 Temptation]
Rhapsody #348
Class Co-President
Registered: 05/21/07
Posts: 1874
Loc: Portsmouth, RI
I've seen carbon poles with the center positioned D-rings and the bridles. I did not like the look of how the pole bent with the center d-rings and for Rhapsody had a carbon pole built with bridles attached in the normal manner at the ends. The bridles were made with spectra and have bungy cord inside the the spectra core so the bridles lay flat on the pole when not in use. It attaches to the topping lift and foreguy just like the old aluminum pole.
#10421 - 10/29/1011:51 AMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Update
[Re: Rhapsody #348]
Bob Rutsch
Governor at Large
Registered: 04/03/00
Posts: 527
Loc: Maryland, USA
I concur with 311. The load applied by the foreguy attached at the center is likely to bend an aluminum pole. As noted in Carbon pole sizing I'd setup like Rhapsody with a bridle especially in breeze.
#10427 - 10/29/1008:00 PMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Update
[Re: Bob Rutsch]
dbows
Senior Member
Registered: 04/16/03
Posts: 650
Loc: Marblehead, MA
My carbon pole has the d rings in the middle with no issue and we have had the chute up in 25+ with no flex. I highly doubt Forte would build a pole like this if it would not hold up. The pole is only 6 1/2 feet from the center - that would have to be a hell of a lot of load to snap off - particularly with the guy twinged down really hard.
The D rings are MUCH easier to handle and the pole will stand up to anything we sail in week in and week out. I would never messing up that sexy carbon with an old school bridal (-:
DB
_________________________
David Bows Mallorca - Hull# 397 ~~~~~_/)~_/)~~~~_/)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~
#10429 - 10/30/1002:51 PMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Update
[Re: Rhapsody #348]
Bob Rutsch
Governor at Large
Registered: 04/03/00
Posts: 527
Loc: Maryland, USA
I suppose my experience watching the carbon pole bend (2.5" Forte with center D-rings)is because we don't use twings, so much more tension on the foreguy. I also explains why I see boats like Smiles with twings on not even bothering to attach their foreguy.
#10438 - 11/01/1003:23 PMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Update
[Re: Rhapsody #348]
cstoddard
J/30 Class Measurer
Registered: 01/11/10
Posts: 108
Loc: Barrington, RI
Been watching this thread for a couple of days It is my recollection that the bridles were left off the 2004 rules by error aluminum poles will require bridles due the stress loads I think Carbon poles would be fine with a D ring when running down wind in the higher wind conditions but I would have concerns as to the loading when beam reaching. Tapered poles which our rules do not allow for are can be built with D rings. I will check with a couple of the pole manufacturers and get there views on the D rings for carbon poles
Trigger ends were not allowed due to the fact they are not retrofitable to the old poles.
_________________________
Charlie Stoddard Falcon #229
#11102 - 02/13/1111:55 AMRe: Spinnaker Pole Bridle Requirements dropped on 2005 Rules Update
[Re: Rhapsody #348]
sailon
Senior Member
Registered: 02/12/11
Posts: 56
Loc: Melbourne, FL
Just noticed this thread about bridles, and perhaps I can share some J-24 experiences. The class no longer requires bridles. This is possible PROVIDED THAT: 1. The twings will need to be moved forward, reducing the need for or load on a foreguy in the center of the pole 2. J-24 regattas rarely sail on reaches, all if not most is dead down wind. I have taken the compromise way out, that is I have bridles on my pole that are duck taped such that the bridle cringle is essentially taped to the middle of the pole. If the loads get to the point where the pole is at risk, the tape rips, saving the pole from breaking. Art Nice Pear
Previous Topic
Index
