Lower shrouds

Discuss the IOM class rules and interpretations

Moderators: Pedro Egea, jeffbyerley

Post Reply
Zoran
CRO NCA Officer
Posts: 32
Joined: 25 Nov 2003, 11:20
Location: CRO 69
Contact:

Lower shrouds

Post by Zoran » 07 Aug 2006, 14:01

Among AGM Resolution there is one to add lower shrouds. I already recieved lots of comments from Croatian sailors and we found that
possible adoption of this proposal will cause additional:

- cost for thin wall masts to save weight specially made and very expensive
- costs for pair of rigging screws
- cost for new pair of shrouds
- time for adjustment of rig after rig change

Explanation coming with the Resolution that:

- "lower shrouds will increase the mast behavior, so the importance of getting a high performance mast will be reduced"
- "those shrouds will improve lateral control of the mast"

are at least doubtful.

What is high performance mast? Current popular 11.0 mm/0.6 mm wall thickness alloy tube with or without spreaders is controllable with a pair of shrouds. Class rules allow you to "play" with position of shroud attachment point, spreader position, mast ram (if any) position so it is up to builder/skipper to find most useful arrangement to suit particular hull design.

Failing to understand how to tune properly a mast/rig is not a reason to change class rules and add additional rigging! Those who have a problem with lateral control of the mast with one pair of shrouds will have even more difficulties with additional pair!

We believe that IOM owners around the world will reject this proposal because above mentioned and other reasons as well.

I am open for any comments.


Zoran
CRO 69
Zoran Grubisa
CRO 69

soeren_andresen
DEN NCA Officer
Posts: 94
Joined: 18 Nov 2003, 10:39
Location: DEN 93, DEN 120
Contact:

Post by soeren_andresen » 08 Aug 2006, 08:13

Hi

Personaly I could not have put it better.
Søren Andresen
Personal sail# DEN 93
HULL#: DEN 93, DEN 120

RoyL
Posts: 705
Joined: 15 Dec 2003, 21:03

Post by RoyL » 08 Aug 2006, 18:27

There was some earlier discussion of this issue on the forum. I believe just about everybody responding seemed to have similar feelings to Zoran. Its always good to have interesting ideas for change presented, but I too personally think this is not a direction the IOM class should go in.

Post Reply