Media

Navigation

Media comments

Media statistics

Albums
3,799
Uploaded media
22,708
Embedded media
19
Comments
425
Disk usage
2.2 GB
DSC00434 Here's a pic of my old Gin Pole.  Anyone can make one of these.  It doesn't have to come apart and you don't need to use stainless steel hardware.
The Gin pole provides the angle needed to raise your mast by using the Jib halyard and a boom vang or mainsheet blocks.
  You could also mount a small boat winch on the Gin pole and use that to pull your mast up.  
I have the yoke tied to the mast near the goose neck fitting and the end of my Gin Pole is about 1" to 2" from my forestay when the mast is up.  If the Gin Pole is too short, the boom vang will have a tendency to pull the yoke out of the mast once the mast is up.
If you set the Gin Pole too low on the mast, the Gin Pole will be too long and you'll have trouble reaching the end of the pole to snap your bridles in when the mast is laying horizontal and ready to be raised.   For this reason I chose to set my Gin Pole so that the yoke is near the goose neck fitting. 

Note how close the blocks of the boom vang are in this picture.  Before I inverted the line locking cam on the pulling block, I used to extend the boom with a wire tail piece that cam off my back stay that was connected to that triangular plate.   By inverting the cam on the block, I was able to do away with the tail piece and be able to connect the block to a shackle on my bow stem chainplate.  This gave me more space for my blocks.   The is another reason why the Gin Pole needs to be set near the goose neck fitting.  If you decide to use a boat winch to pull your mast up, you could mount the Gin Pole lower but the lower the Gin Pole on the mast, the longer it has to be.

DSC00434 Here's a pic of my old Gin Pole. Anyone can make one of these. It doesn't have to come apart and you don't need to use stainless steel hardware. The Gin pole provides the angle needed to raise your mast by using the Jib halyard and a boom vang or mainsheet blocks. You could also mount a small boat winch on the Gin pole and use that to pull your mast up. I have the yoke tied to the mast near the goose neck fitting and the end of my Gin Pole is about 1" to 2" from my forestay when the mast is up. If the Gin Pole is too short, the boom vang will have a tendency to pull the yoke out of the mast once the mast is up. If you set the Gin Pole too low on the mast, the Gin Pole will be too long and you'll have trouble reaching the end of the pole to snap your bridles in when the mast is laying horizontal and ready to be raised. For this reason I chose to set my Gin Pole so that the yoke is near the goose neck fitting. Note how close the blocks of the boom vang are in this picture. Before I inverted the line locking cam on the pulling block, I used to extend the boom with a wire tail piece that cam off my back stay that was connected to that triangular plate. By inverting the cam on the block, I was able to do away with the tail piece and be able to connect the block to a shackle on my bow stem chainplate. This gave me more space for my blocks. The is another reason why the Gin Pole needs to be set near the goose neck fitting. If you decide to use a boat winch to pull your mast up, you could mount the Gin Pole lower but the lower the Gin Pole on the mast, the longer it has to be.

  • 0
  • 0
What it's supposed to look like....

My dad's idea was to have windows like an airplane, aluminum frames having the right shape and then just installed in the cabinsides.  John Luhrs later thought it was best to use the same commercially-available portlights all other boatbuilders used; and the design went downhill from there.

It was my idea to extend the settee berths under the bulkhead-- I had seen it on some more-obscure boat before.  By doing this we got a 5-berth 25-footer that still has a decent cockpit.

The wrap-around coaming was my dad's idea but we all (Bob Seidelmann, my brother, Warren Luhrs, my dad and I) contributed to it.  It is good-looking, if awkward functionally, except for at the back where it finishes off the cockpit very well.

The semi-flush deck (cabinsides tapering into nothing ahead of the mast) made my dad call this initial edition the 'blister-canopy' (as with the Supermarine Spitfire) or the 'bubble-top' (what they called the North American P-51C with Malcolm hood). Once a fighter pilot, always a fighter pilot....

The rig is tall and the boom short for an IOR-influenced boat of this period-- it's technically high-aspect.  The narrow stern is an IOR feature as well, meant to get the smallest-possible girth measurements to 'defeat' the rule.  Still the boat rates 19.4, not 18.0; and so it is not a quarter-tonner.

The narrow stern actually makes the boat appear and behave very much like a double-ender, being responsible for the boat taking a following sea rather well and leaving the water close to the way it found it (if the outboard is not too heavy or kept down).

Notice that the mainsheet in this drawing goes straight down to where Diana's bridgedeck-mounted traveler goes.  ;)

The parallelogram keel is a sign of the times (1972).  In 1974 it would have had a vertical trailing edge.  The semi-skeg in front of the rudder is as well; in 1976 my dad would eliminate all but a minor dimple there on the Raider and by 1978 he had said he should have done without it entirely.  Other than this, the H33 looks like a direct descendant of the H25.  Both boats are noted for early heeling, stability once heeled, good pointing ability and the tendency to be driven hard by the jib (throttle) and steadied by the main (shock absorber).  I call this a 'hellandback' boat, because that's where it'll take you.

What it's supposed to look like.... My dad's idea was to have windows like an airplane, aluminum frames having the right shape and then just installed in the cabinsides. John Luhrs later thought it was best to use the same commercially-available portlights all other boatbuilders used; and the design went downhill from there. It was my idea to extend the settee berths under the bulkhead-- I had seen it on some more-obscure boat before. By doing this we got a 5-berth 25-footer that still has a decent cockpit. The wrap-around coaming was my dad's idea but we all (Bob Seidelmann, my brother, Warren Luhrs, my dad and I) contributed to it. It is good-looking, if awkward functionally, except for at the back where it finishes off the cockpit very well. The semi-flush deck (cabinsides tapering into nothing ahead of the mast) made my dad call this initial edition the 'blister-canopy' (as with the Supermarine Spitfire) or the 'bubble-top' (what they called the North American P-51C with Malcolm hood). Once a fighter pilot, always a fighter pilot.... The rig is tall and the boom short for an IOR-influenced boat of this period-- it's technically high-aspect. The narrow stern is an IOR feature as well, meant to get the smallest-possible girth measurements to 'defeat' the rule. Still the boat rates 19.4, not 18.0; and so it is not a quarter-tonner. The narrow stern actually makes the boat appear and behave very much like a double-ender, being responsible for the boat taking a following sea rather well and leaving the water close to the way it found it (if the outboard is not too heavy or kept down). Notice that the mainsheet in this drawing goes straight down to where Diana's bridgedeck-mounted traveler goes. ;) The parallelogram keel is a sign of the times (1972). In 1974 it would have had a vertical trailing edge. The semi-skeg in front of the rudder is as well; in 1976 my dad would eliminate all but a minor dimple there on the Raider and by 1978 he had said he should have done without it entirely. Other than this, the H33 looks like a direct descendant of the H25. Both boats are noted for early heeling, stability once heeled, good pointing ability and the tendency to be driven hard by the jib (throttle) and steadied by the main (shock absorber). I call this a 'hellandback' boat, because that's where it'll take you.

  • 0
  • 1