Traveler

[RichH]

RichH, you wrote 'The traveller only controls effectively the upwards motion of the boom' back in #49.
With the traveller moving side to side, how can it it control the upwards motion of the the boom? What am I missing?

Rich

Where is Don Guillette when you need him?

Perhaps a poor choice of words were used in this earlier post. I really should be more clear and say the traveller 'primarily' RESTRAINS the upwards motion of the boom ... the traveller's prime function is to change the ANGLE of ATTACK (when traveling from the centerline to the ends of the track).

In a normally configured rig.
1. If the mainsheet is cleated, what changes when the traveller is adjusted in/out? Answ.: only the angle of attack.
2. With the traveller cleated what changes when the mainsheet is adjusted in/out? Answ: angle of attack AND twist (Why would anyone want to change the angle of attack AND twist at the same time????????)
3. If I had a super-strong vang system applied and the traveller was cleated what would happen if I adjusted the mainsheet in/out? ..... Answ: the mainsheet would only control ........ angle of attack !!!

Therefore, a Rigid high powered vang system (which can restrain the boom from rising similar to a traveller BUT ... the boom can now swing all the way out until it hits a shroud) can do the exact same function as the traveller and can keep the boom aft end at a very constant vertical angle. Therefore a rigid vang can easily be used or substituted as a traveller ... and with 'better advantages'.
Need to change the twist on a rigid vang (traveller-less) system???? .... simply change the 'length' of the vang to get the correct height of the end of the boom!!!!!
... and on such a system the mainsheet ONLY controls the angle of attack, simply because the boom cannot rise (causing twist).

So, with a super strong (rigid) vang system:
Mainsheet = angle of attack
Vang = twist.
NO Traveller needed (redundant because of the RIGID vang).

hope this is 'better' ???


My 'read' is with the traveller removed its easier and more advantageous to use 'end boom sheeting' (mainsheet) and little or much less resultant 'clutter' in the cockpit as happens with mid-boom sheeting and (mid-boom) traveller position. With NO traveller and end-boom sheeting, almost all the 'clutter' is gone and the mainsheet can be 'behind' and within easy immediate reach of the helmsman. With midboom sheeting, you need 'clatter trap' added so that the helmsman can use the traveller/mainsheet controls and usually has to leave the helm and go forward to the 'coachroof' to make these adjustments ..... or needs 'trained crew'. With aftboom sheeting and NO traveller ... all the helmsman has to do is 'reach behind' for the mainsheet --- much simpler, requires less force, less 'clutter' to trip over, no need to leave the helm / no need for 'trained crew'.

;-)

 

[25yearslater]

I will toss this out there for consideration. What we are dealing with is an airfoil. What matters more is the chord of the sail or what is properly termed in sailing, draft. The greater the chord the higher the lift and conversely the less the chord the less the lift. Angle of attack is more a function of an airfoils chord. A larger chord requires less angle of attack to produce the same amount of lift as compared to the shallower chord at a given speed. The trade off is in induced drag with the larger chord producing more induced drag but more lift at the same angle of attack as a shallower chord operating at the same angle of attack. The shallower chord has to be operated at the higher angle of attack to produce this same lift at the same speed. What I would conclude is, much as an aeronautical engineer considers the intended use of an aircraft when determining which characteristics to incorporate into the design sailboats offer that same option whether it's cruising or racing round the bouys. I don't know if there is a single answer other than each sail and boat will offer advantages and disadvantages across a broad spectrum of purposes.

 

[BobM]

Clutter in the cockpit

My 'read' is with the traveller removed its easier and more advantageous to use 'end boom sheeting' (mainsheet) and little or much less resultant 'clutter' in the cockpit as happens with mid-boom sheeting and (mid-boom) traveller position. With NO traveller and end-boom sheeting, almost all the 'clutter' is gone and the mainsheet can be 'behind' and within easy immediate reach of the helmsman. With midboom sheeting, you need 'clatter trap' added so that the helmsman can use the traveller/mainsheet controls and usually has to leave the helm and go forward to the 'coachroof' to make these adjustments ..... or needs 'trained crew'. With aftboom sheeting and NO traveller ... all the helmsman has to do is 'reach behind' for the mainsheet --- much simpler, requires less force, less 'clutter' to trip over, no need to leave the helm / no need for 'trained crew'.

;-)

This thread has been interesting, but I will only comment on Rich's statement about clutter in the cockpit being alleviated by end boom sheeting, which I have. It certainly is simpler, but you end up with a lot of sheet (pun intended) in the cockpit when the boom is at mid line and it can be a pain (sheet everywhere!).

 

[Todd Smith]

Draft is "thickness" in an airfoil design, not chord. Chord is the distance between the leading edge (luff) to the trailing edge (leech).

RichH's description is perfect on the use of vang+sheet to reduce the need for a traveller, but I find having the sheet behind the wheel to be awkward.

 

[sandpiper10471]

Well written, Rich. Most of the comments in this post refer to non-bendy masthead rigs. Fractional rigs change everything because of the differing angles and compression forces of the vang and mainsheet which bend the mast and alter sail shape differently. Surprised noone has mentioned the Hoyt boom concept on this thread - a rigid boom slotted into the deck thereby maintaining a constant elevation of the clew. They have been used on headsails but I don't know of any bigger boats where they have been used for the main. There is also the aerorig which has a rotating mast and a boom which handles both main and jib. In both these configurations, no vang and no traveler.

 

[25yearslater]

Chord is indeed the thickness of an airfoil in aeronautical engineering.

 

[flynfol]

Since we are talking about airfoils and shapes........if you look at an aircraft propellor, you will notice the root airfoil has more angle of attack than the tip. This is because the root speed is less than the tip speed. The same is accomplished with the traveler. More angle of attack at the foot where the slower airflow is. It's a beautiful thing........sail shape that is ;-)

 

[flynfol]

Better open those aerodynamic books again...;-) Chord is leading edge to trailing edge distance. Thickness (draft in sails) decribes exactly that. An example would be a NACA 0012 airfoil.....last two numbers would be "thickness" of airfoil in percent of chord length. I'm thinking you mean camber......

 

[All U Get]

I've been thinking of this link and I have a question about the length of the traveler, if its mid-boom will its length be half of the boats beam? I would have liked to have had our boom further leward on some days without any twist added to the sail. The vang I have doesn't hold the boom effectively. (If this is beyond the thread, just bump it out.)
All U Get

 

[Rolltacker]

All U Get,
I am new to this site and don't presume to know everything, but will offer some thoughts since no one else has.Guess everyone else is watching......The Wedding.
I believe a longer traveler would always be a good thing. It's current length probably has nothing to do with the sheet location, whether mid-boom or end boom.
To solve the problem you state, it seems to me a stronger vang could address the problem more cheaply than replacing the traveler, though lengthening the traveler should certainly relieve the work expected of the vang,and relieve the additional bending stress that a more powerful vang would impose on the boom.It will still impose a load on the boom that end boom sheeting would not impose, but would not test the strength of the boom as the single point stress imposed by a stronger vang would.
Before vangs,end boom sheeting allowed booms to be quite small, since little bending stresses were imposed. Indeed, beach cats with wide travelers and no vangs often forgo the boom alltogether, as you probably know.
Since Catalinas are such popular boats, there must be other owners who have experienced the deficiencies you have, so check their sites for more specific information.

 

[Stu Jackson]

Actually, Catalinas have pretty long travelers, that actually work. Their length is about twice what I've seen on Beneteaus of the same size. The longer the traveler the more control one has on the mainsail.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

I'm still drooling ....

over that photo that MS posted of that Morris Yacht ... it don't matter to me what kind of vang or traveler it has on there ... I like!

 

[Stu Jackson]

More traveler stuff

Yup, Scott, that Hinckley picture in reply #80 was way cool.

So, when I took my boat out Saturday, I did some "esperimentin'" and here's what I found:

Contrary to popular belief, and some posts on this thread, when I pull down on my vang going upwind my boom goes outboard. I have a Garhauer rigid vang, which was discussed in Maine Sail's Reply #80, and he's right. A Garhauer rigid vang is NOT one of those "rigid" vangs discussed by Rich, it is just a "better" higher purchase soft vang with a spring inside to be able to do away with a topping lift. We have mid-boom sheeting.

Think about it: when you vang, it pulls the boom down and actually kinda "loosens" whatever tension is on the mainsheet, allowing the boom to go outboard. You then need to readjust the tension on the mainsheet to put the boom back where it was before you vanged.

Since the boom moves athwartships when the vang is engaged, I'd say it DOES change the angle of attack.

While there is great merit in the discussions about the ability to use the vang and mainsheet only, I simply disagree with those who say there's no difference if you have a traveler or not on "standard" recreational boats.

 

[Alan]

Holy Crap !! I can't believe I've missed this ENTIRE thread till now. Reading some of these posts is akin to listening to the 'birthers' and Trump talk politics. It makes no sense.
For those who are in the beginning stages of learning sail trim you have my complete sympathy. Don't think for one second that just because something shows up in print or on your computer screen it's 'fact'.

Travelers are a necessary sail trim control IF you plan to sail your boat to its designed potential. Of course you can sail a boat without one and many folks do. Don't however think that eliminating the traveler will allow the boat to sail to the level of a boat that has one. The simple fact is that a traveler (like most everything else) costs money. Eliminate it and you've saved money. Multiply that by several hundreds and you begin to see why some manufacturers might want to do this. Staying in business in todays economic environment takes a great deal of work and cost savings are a critical part of the formula. The result is some boat builders opt to design or re-configure their boats with less than optimal sailing benefit. Many potential buyers may not perceive this failing or even look at it as just one less control to have to 'mess' with.
Most sailing innovations come from racing (much as in cars). Racing sailboats are hugely concerned with weight savings, if it ain't needed we don't want it. No racing sailboats of today have eliminated their travelers. They certainly cost money and they do weigh something but their gain in sailing performance more than makes up for it.

Don Guillette is way more than (as he puts it) 'a common seaman'. He has helped thousands of folks learn the finer points of sail trim. It might pay to listen and understand his point of view.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Stu, I must have been confused ...

by what looks like a Morris Yachts cove stripe on the boat in the photograph. You'll have to excuse me, we rarely get a chance to see either a Morris or a Hinckley here on Lake Hopatcong.

I'm confused by your post. You initiated vang sheeting as Rich described in his multiple postings. By doing that, you removed the element of twist and draft control from the mainsheet, and then you used the mainsheet to adjust angle of attack. If you didn't use the traveler to adjust the angle of attack (as you could have), the traveler was needed for what?

It seems that you just demonstrated to yourself that the traveler was not needed and that angle of attack was controlled by the mainsheet. Please explain ...

 

[JohnShannon]

Scott, you are right (sort of). A strong vang and mainsheet combo work fine the vang controls the twist and the mainsheet the angle of attack. The system has limits however.

In lighter air you will want some twist and still want to sheet in till the boom is on the centerline. Problem then is that to get the boom to the center without a traveller requires a lot of tension on the mainsheet which will remove the twist that you so desired. So in this case by moving the traveller to windward you can pull the boom to the centerline without excessive downforce via the mainsheet.

For the ultimate in performance you want a traveller. Reduced performance, reduced cost, more cockpit room, fewer lines, etc you don't need it.

 

[RichH]

In lighter air you will want some twist and still want to sheet in till the boom is on the centerline. Problem then is that to get the boom to the center without a traveller requires a lot of tension on the mainsheet which will remove the twist that you so desired. So in this case by moving the traveller to windward you can pull the boom to the centerline without excessive downforce via the mainsheet.

Easily done by lengthening the rigid boom, then pulling in on the mainsheet.

For the ultimate in performance you want a traveller. Reduced performance, reduced cost, more cockpit room, fewer lines, etc you don't need it.

The boats mentioned in the original post are not 'ultimate performance' boats and apparently with end boom sheeting, rigid vangs, no traveller ... yield a 'more simple to sail' and less cluttered boat. Apparently thats what these customers are looking for and what sells them.

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Defending the traveler ...

John, I've always acknowledged those issues. After last years discussion on travelers, I upgraded mine so that I could have line control rather than the pin stops. It wasn't an easy replacement either. I had to get a new track and custom fit it into the bridge deck so that the integrated cam cleats on the control blocks will allow clearance for the lazerette openings.

I had already sunk a lot of money into buying the Schaefer controls (to be consistent with my original track) when I thought about converting to a Harken windward sheeting model instead. I'm not sure yet if I am going to regret not making that conversion.

It makes me laugh that so many people have gotten really upset with me for not defending the traveler when I have one and use it as it is intended.

Stu, if that boat in Maine Sails post #80 is a Hinckley, they must be doing a pretty good knock-off of a Morris Yacht! Doesn't that coach roof look a lot like this one?

http://www.morrisyachts.com/The-Morris-M42

 

[LuzSD]

Re: Defending the traveler ...

wow, those (Morris) are gorgeous boats..... I have seen them here but never realized what I was looking at. Thanks for that link.

 

[Maine Sail]

Stu, if that boat in Maine Sails post #80 is a Hinckley, they must be doing a pretty good knock-off of a Morris Yacht! Doesn't that coach roof look a lot like this one?

http://www.morrisyachts.com/The-Morris-M42

That boat is a Morris M-36 which is moored not to far from here. It is not a Hinckley. The MY logo in the middle of the cove stripe is a dead give away that she's a Morris..