deltrott

Thanks Guys. I think that at last we have a solution (more accurately, two solutions!). First, thanks to JohnE for shedding light on how the "America" replica got the job done. I guess we can conclude that slacking off the clew and letting the foot of the sail ride forward on the boom is a practical solution. However... I decided that the logical way to answer a schooner rig question was to ask the folks who build and sail them, so I posted the question on the Wooden Boat Forum. I got several replies that clearly explained and illustrated what I think must be the "real" solution. To simplify the explanation, the answer is to lace the luff to the sail to the hanks with a jackline so that, as the sail is lowered and furled, the slack in the jackline allows the luff to to be pulled away from the hanks on the forestay. As the sail is hoisted, the jackline tightens and the luff is drawn up tight to the hanks. It should be noted that this only needs to be done for the portion of the luff that's closer to the clew than the length of the foot of the sail. The upper portion of the luff can be directly hanked to the stay in the usual fashion. Elegant! For all those Baltimore Clipper/Revenue Cutter modelers, one of the Wooden Boat guys noted that the furling problem also exists with mainsails on sharply raked masts, and the same jackline system is used to attach the luff of the mainsail to the mast hoops.

To SpyGlass: Yes, un-hanking would certainly get the job done, BUT...... In "America's" case, the hank that jams on the stay first is about 40 feet up the luff (over 30 feet off the deck), which makes that a pretty unlikely option. I've attached a couple of photos of the "America" replica built in 1967 which show the details pretty clearly. Note how loosely the foot is laced to the boom. As a wild-assed guess, loosening the clew and letting the foot ride forward on the boom is still my best guess.

John, thanks for the picture. It does help, but in the wrong way! This is a double headsail rig, so the forestay runs to the bow rather than the end of the bowsprit. This makes it stand much more vertical than the old single headsail rig such as on America, and that in turn allows the sail to run down the stay much further. Note, however, that the staysail in the picture hasn't quite come all the way down. If you draw an imaginary line from the topmost bunch of hanks back to the clew at the end of the boom, it looks as if it would be pretty close to perpendicular to the stay, which makes it a good illustration of the problem I'm trying to solve. To speak to JerseyCity Frankie's comment, I couldn't agree more that these questions are what the forum is all about. After all, that's why it's called the Nautical Research Guild. As to whether "America's" artists just got the rig wrong, the jury's still out on that, but there's not much question that the boomed forestaysail was fairly common in that period and seems to carry over to the present day on small workboats.

Yes, a club foot would certainly solve the problem BUT: 1. Given the geometry of "America's" staysail, the boom would have to be shaortened something like 12-13 feet to allow the sail to come fully down. 2. All the sailplans and paintings that show the boom are pretty clear in showing it the full length of the foot. 3. Neglecting "America", we still have the evidence of a fully boomed staysail being a reasonably common rig. Glad you got a chance to see the Taubman model. I wasn't aware of it, but it needs to go on my bucket list.

Exactly! I suspect the debate about whether or when "America" carried a boomed foresail may never be resolved. The Wilson sailplan apparently done by her original New York sailmaker shows a loose-footed sail, while the Ratsey sailplan done in England in 1852 shows a boomed sail. Interestingly, the Stearman rigging plan copied in Rousmaniere's book (which would appear to be the most authoritative and most neglected existing plan of "America") shows a loose-footed staysail. I believe that all of the photos in existence were taken after "America" was sold and re-rigged with a more modern double headsail arrangment. The re-rigging makes a lot of sense since the huge original 1200 square foot sail must have been a bear to handle, boomed or not! However, regardless of "America's" rig, a boom-footed syaysail seems to have been fairly common in the mid-nineteenth century, and seems to have survived to the present day in workboats. (See the thread on the Biloxi schooner restoration, if I read the photos correctly.) Not being able to furl a large headsail in a blow seems at best unseamanlike and at worst downright dangerous, so I'm not ready to dismiss the issue with John Leather's "impossible to get the staysail fully down" remark. So we return to the problem of how to do it. Starting with the above suggestion, here are few wild guesses to consider: 1. Loose the clew and allow the foot to slid forward through the lacings on the boom. As you say, a crazy amount of work. However, as the clew slides forward it would slacken the lacing, so it might not be as hard as it looks. Presumably the sail could be rigged with an in-haul and out-haul to ease the task. 2. At least in "America's" case, the bottom sail had a 12' bonnet attached with a simple latching. Unhitching the bonnet would leave the upper part of the sail loose-footed and manageable, but that still leaves the the problem of how to get the bonnet down on deck. Also, it doesn't look likely that accessing the latching and attaching a temporary sheet to the new clew 12 feet off the deck is practical. 3. Allow the boom to rise and furl the sail against the forestay. Weird and I've never seen evidence of anything like this being done. Also, it leaves the end of the boom and clew some 40-odd feet up the forestay. Not very likely! On balance, I think I what you propose is the most likely solution, unless someone has something better to offer. As I've said, the laced boom-footed forestaysail is not an historical oddity, so there must be some old salts out there who have hands-on experience. Come tell us how it's done!

I totally agree with your comments regarding furling a loose-footed or club-footed staysail, but I think you're missing the problem with the fully-boomed large staysail of the mid-nineteenth century. Using "America" as the example, the length of the foot of the sail is about 43' (depending on which of the several sail plans you prefer). Since the sail is apparently laced to its boom along its entire foot, that places the clew of the sail 43' away from the tack. However, the forestay rakes sharply aft (roughly a 45 degree angle). Thus the distance from the clew to a typical hank about halfway up the sail is much shorter, as little as about 30'. Even allowing foir some stretch of the canvas, you can't get a hank 30' away from a clew that's fixed 43' from the bottom of the forestay to slide very far down that forestay! This is a well-known problem and more modern rigs address it in a number of ways such as the club foot or attaching the clew to a boom that can ride forward on a track or "horse" as the sail is lowered. (See Howard Chapelle's comments on the Jumbo Boom Rider in The American Fishing Schooners.) It should also be noted that luffs of contemporary forestaysails are much more nearly vertical than in "America's" case, so the geometry of the problem is not nearly as severe and doesn't pose as much difficulty. To restate my question: Some authorities state that it's impossible to get a boomed staysail fully down at the luff, and contemporary rigs go to considerable trouble to make it possible in ways that "America" apparently didn't use. Do I therefore accept that "America's" forestaysail couldn't be furled (unlikely), or can someone enlighten me to how it was done?

How did they furl a boomed forestaysail (jib, if you like) such as shown on many paintings, sail plans and current models of the schooner "America" ? There's debate over whether "America" actually had a boomed or loose-footed staysail, but lacing the foot of the sail to a full-length boom pivoting on (or near) the forestay was certainly accepted practice in the mid-1800's. The problem comes from the fact that the shortest distance of the clew to the luff (measured perpindicular to the luff) is much less than the length of the foot of the sail (some 13-14 feet less in America's case), so the clew must be able to move forward that amount as the sail slides down the forestay. With the foot of the sail laced to a fixed boom this is apparently not possible. The practice in more contemporary designs is either to attach the boom to a "horse" allowing it to slide forward as the sail is lowered, or to lace only the after portion of the sail to a short boom or "club". The only reference to this problem that I've found is a comment in John Leather's The Gaff Rig Handbook that with this arrangement "... it is usually impossible to get the staysail fully down at the luff". This hardly seems satisfactory for a rig such as "America" with its huge forestaysail, and I believe there must have been some way to furl the sail. I can think of several possibilities, but none seem very efficient or seaman-like, and I can find no pictorial or written evidence. Does anyone have anything to offer on the subject?