Defective 1984 E 381?????

L

ligolaiva38

Member II
Defective Rigging 1984 E 381?????

I have studied all the rigging postings on this Ericson site and now I started tuning my rig because it hasn't been tuned right for some reason since I had the mast refurbished and new standing rigging installed by the mast rebuilding and rigging company.

As I looked down the mast, standing on the port side, the upper and intermediate shrouds came down the middle of the mast width exactly to the chain plate. Looking at the starboard side of the mast, the upper and intermediate shrouds came down the mast angling to the stern past the mast width several inches which seemed very strange.

After trying to figure out why the starboard shroud was angling backward, it finally became apparent that the chain plate was not in the exact midddle between the forward and stern lower stays chainplates. Instead, it was two inches further back (closer) toward the aft chainplate. On the opposit port side, the upper and intermediate shroud chain plate is in exact middle so therefor the shrouds came straight down the middle of the mast.

When the last rig tuner tuned the rig we noticed that the lower spreader on the port side would losely shift forward and backward when pushing the shrouds forward and backward parellel to the boat. He tightened up the bolts on the spreaders as much as he could, but the port lower spreader still shifted until he tightened up the upper and intermiate shrouds tight-- very thight. I am speculating it was done overly tight to keep the spreader from shifting back and forth. Which now made the interior head door not close and a few other things had chaged etc. When I lossened the back stay 6 turns the door was a bit better, but still couldn't close.

Now I am wondering if that spreader has been damaged over the years due to the starboard shrouds not having the chain plate centered between the fore and aft lowers? Could the tuning be off due to this? Is it twisting the mast and the boat?

Or, Could it be possible that the sturn angling of the upper and intermediate shrouds on the starboard side is on all Ericson 38's or has my chainplate been defectively installed originally off center?

If it has been installed bad what effect does it have on the mast and how dangerous might it be for the mast. None of the rig tuners have ever known or stated that the the starboard upper and intermediate shrouds were angling to the stern because of the chainplate not being centered. Perhaps maybe, it means no effect what so ever on tuning the mast and it makes no difference.

I am wondering how other E 38's upper and intermediate shroud chainplates are installed and if the shrouds are angled or come down straight with the mast on both sides.
I am also hoping to hear from Seth or anyone else on this situation or danger and what can be done to do to correct it if it is wrong.

Thanks a lot for any and all replys.

John
Laiva 1984 E 381
 
Last edited:
R

rwthomas1

Sustaining Partner
John,
That is interesting. I don't recall exactly how it looks but I know that my upper/intermediate chainplates are both closer to the aft lower chainplates than the forward lower chainplates. I had not noticed any discrepancies in these distances but I am certainly now interested in doing some measuring! I have never noticed if the shrouds are angled aft and I think I would have since I have spent lots of time looking up, scratching head, and trying to tune the thing.

Regarding your problem it may not be a huge deal. I would think that the important part is that the mast is CENTERED or perfectly inline with an imaginary line "drawn" between the upper/intermediate chainplates? Given your 2" discrepancy moving the mast step 1" aft should do it. Then the mast should be in column albeit slightly twisted in relationship to the centerline of the boat.

Then again, if this really is an issue moving a chainplate may not be a really big deal either. IIRC, the tierods allow for movement so relocating the "U" bolt just a few inches may be well within adjustability. Take a long hard look, get some expert opinions, measure plenty before doing it!

FWIW, my spreaders are not bolted on at all. They mount on protruding bosses basically just socketing into place and two large pins drop in and get cotter pins.

I will try to check the location of the chainplates this week but the cover is still on so it may not work.

RT
 
Last edited:
Christian Williams

Christian Williams

E381 - Los Angeles
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
I'm looking at this boat next week, and will have a rigger consult.

Anybody have further thoughts on the issue described by the owner?

Christian
 
Afrakes

Afrakes

Sustaining Member
Misaligned chainplates

No specific thoughts on the E38 rigging. However when building an A-frame for the mast raising system on my former 27 I found a similar situation. I measured from the forward port chain plate to the bow fitting to set the length of each leg of the frame. Assuming that the starboard plate was the same length from the bow I fabricated both legs. When I went to install the frame using the forward chain plates as the pivot points I noticed that the head of the frame where the legs converged didn't line up with the center of the bow fitting. After scratching my head a bit and rechecking the measurements of the legs, they were the same. Only then did I measure the distance from the starboard chain plate to the bow and discovered that plate was one inch further away from the bow than the port plate. Was that planned at the factory? I doubt it. I just figured that someone had messed up and put it in the wrong place. I shortened up the port leg and got on with the project.
 
Tom Metzger

Tom Metzger

Sustaining Partner
Christian - Two inches in 45 feet +/- doesn't sound like something to worry about. According to my slide rule that's a fairly small angle. I'd call it zero* to slide rule accuracy. :nerd:

Best of luck if you get it. Oh yeah, make sure the engine wiring is up to present day ABYC standards, and the gauges and switches are brand new and of good quality. I can't get out there in February or March. :0
 
bgary

bgary

Advanced Beginner
Blogs Author
I might even still have one.

kari said:
I wonder how many younger people even know what a slide rule is?
Click to expand...

I started (and happily, moved on from) my engineering career at a time when the slide rule was still a mainstream tool. I received a fair amount of ...uh... disapproving looks when I chose to use an HP65 (and, later, the awesome HP41) to do my structural calcs. Fun times.

Oh, and it was awesome, too, when we switched from ink-on-vellum to pencil-on-mylar.

ObNote, the HP41 was (IMO) a huge leap in the toolbag of an offshore navigator, at the time, too. With an HP41 and the "nav pack", one could reduce celestial sights with a few key strokes, and without bringing worksheets or volumes of sight-reduction tables on the boat. At least, as long as the batteries stayed charged.

I think it's time for my nap, now.
 
V

Vagabond39

Member III
Slide Rule

Tom:
Slide Rules are a lost art. Circular or straight.
When working at the New York Naval Shipyard back when younger, the engineer I was working with had me check the specifications on some newfangled Transfer Resistors, as they were known. Part of that was lead length and diameter. So I borrowed a 6" vernier caliper. The engineer walked in, saw what I was doing, and asked where I had gotten the caliper. Told I had borrowed it, he walked out. When he came back, he had a large wooden box, with a 12" vernier caliper, saying "this will give greater accuracy." When questioned, he replied like using a 12" slide rule, vice a small one.
Like using a pipe wrench to splice #30 wires.
Bob
P. S. Merry Christmas
 
Rick R.

Rick R.

Contributing Partner
bgary said:
ObNote, the HP41 was (IMO) a huge leap in the toolbag of an offshore navigator, at the time, too. With an HP41 and the "nav pack", one could reduce celestial sights with a few key strokes, and without bringing worksheets or volumes of sight-reduction tables on the boat. At least, as long as the batteries stayed charged.

I think it's time for my nap, now.
Click to expand...

My wife asked me if I needed the 2016 Nautical Almanac. I told her I could do sun sights using the 2015 Almanac but it won't improve my accuracy. Thank God for that and my Casio FX-75 (the best $14 one can spend at Walmart).....
 
Tom Metzger

Tom Metzger

Sustaining Partner
Christian - If you press charges for theft of thread I'll plead guilty.

I hate it when this happens. :rolleyes_d:

Let us know how the inspection goes.
 
Last edited:
V

Vagabond39

Member III
Slide Rules

mfield said:
Not so I'm glad to say. You still need to use the trusty E6B for your private pilots license.

Now summing items from a table of logarithms, that is a lost art, and I'm happy about it.
Click to expand...
Lots of various types of slide rules still in use. Bearing rate slide rules, for shipboard use, slide rules for calculating the cubic yard of cement needed even a few old is - was for calculating torpedo setting.
Slide rules excell at simultaneous sin & cos readings.
The first manmade structure designe entirely on a computer was a dam, that failed and killed hundreds.
Another advantage is "the Computer is down" excuse doesn't apply. So many functions we have completed for hundreds of years or longer, are now "Computer Dependent".
As fo Privet Pilots, I flew with one, and did his navigation, visual, down I-95.
Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top