One v. Two Sets of Spreaders

[Andy Schell]

I'm in the process of re-rigging an old 35' yawl with Dux rigging, intending for offshore work. The rig, as is, is deck-stepped with single spreaders, fore and aft lowers, and a split backstay (to make room for the mizzen). I've already re-done the backstays as twins.

I want to add an inner forestay on the mast, and am wondering the best way to do this. As I see it, options are to add the forestay (which already has a reinforced deck fitting), and add either fixed intermediate shrouds, running backstays, or both. Reading Brion's book, the rig would then resemble the Lyle Hess rig he describes, which had both fixed, aft-led intermediates and running backstays.

My question regards the number of spreaders. I recently ordered a Cape Horn windvane from Yves Gelinas. He went round the world on an Alberg 30, and rigged it to be, in theory, "capsize-proof." He actually bought a bigger mast section than original (deck-stepped), and added a second set of spreaders, which would seem counterintuitive, considering the larger section. My only guess is that the second set of spreaders made for three shorter lengths of unsupported mast rather than two longer lengths of a single-spreader rig, which might prevent the mast from snapping in a knock-down or capsize? As it turned out, he did capsize and lost the mast due to undersizing the chainplate bolts, which sheared.

My question is this: does two sets of spreaders on a deck-stepped mast designed for one set add any advantages in strength, ie "capsize proof"? Disadvantages (besides weight).

[Robbie.g]

obviously shorter panels would be stronger. But as you pointed out, Yves Gelinas upsized the rig without giving due regard to the extra loads that a mast with an adverse moment of inertia had on the rest of the boat. The addition of a 2nd set of spreaders, is also sometimes more time (money) consuming than one may first think..
See thread 894 in the archive...
Cheers