Amel Downwind Pole Rigging

[@akdf85]

your video reinforces me in the fact of having the humility to know what we do not know. fortunately I followed the procedure of the Amel manual. I have on board the three blue, yellow & red lines. thanks for this reminder

[@billrouse4540]

This is one of the best videos regarding Amel yachts I have ever seen. It is done with detailed, accurate, and understandable data. Huge applause! Standing ovation! I really hope that you continue this. Another subject with much misinformation is the "Alignment of the Engine to the C-Drive." The same KZbinr who shows in multiple videos the Fore Guy rigged incorrectly, reducing its ability to stretch, also produced a C-drive to engine alignment video. In that video, he says, "Don't worry if your alignment is off by a few degrees." I know this erroneous statement cost several Amel owners thousands of dollars/euros. Thanks so much for this.

[@billkinney4794]

If you have a problem with my video, please address me. Preferably with a technical response to what is a technical post. Personal insults are uncalled for.

[@sailingperdika]

Very many thanks Bill for taking the time to make this video. With all the discussions around dismasting and many of us having watched other videos on pole rigging, we are please to have a definitive guide backed by maths and science. I second Paul’s request for more videos, we’d support Patreon on that basis as we rate you very highly. Definitely videos on fishing would be VERY welcome. We are new to ketch as well as Amel ownership so downwind sail configurations, how you hove to in a ketch, your MOB procedure, anchoring ( normal conditions and in a swell) your tool kit, replacing the bowthruster seals…and other msintenance plus Karen’s provisioning tips etc, etc…

[@timbev99]

Many thanks Bill for your most informative video. We have been rigging our poles incorrectly, and your video will make us change that. It is refreshing to have a video on YT that is backed up by facts and numbers.

[@steveburton5825]

Very timely Bill. I think you might have hit the nail on the head why some Amel's have suffered mast failures while most haven't. I've sailed on a SM that dipped her pole on a previous voyage and the end point exploded which again saved the mast. The mast isn't (and can't reasonably be) designed to take point loads of more than 2 tons. I'm also always very careful about replacing lines with Dynema as often times the original lines are designed to be the weak point. It makes sense in a lot of instances but for others, like this foreguy example, I'd far rather lose a line than my mast or even the pole.

[@theboatadventure]

Your video is very informative. I hope to see many more of these comprehensive style videos that will assist Amel owners in the future. All Amel owners who buy an Amel for the first time are given opinions/advice from people who don’t understand the reasons why things are the way they are. Some changes are evolutionary such as shut off valves on the water distribution from the main through hull. I can only hope the type of video you have just supplied covers so many other Amel specific issues and remedies. I’m 5 years into owning a 54 and still learning and also hoping for improvements that don’t lead me wrong. Thank you

[@billkinney4794]

One of the things I enjoy about boating and sailing in particular, is that there is ALWAYS something new to learn. Anybody who thinks they know it all is going to come to grief.

[@mariawadsworth7290]

Excellent, you explained it very well.

[@billkinney4794]

Many thanks!

[@BobThomson-q2j]

Thank you Bill. A very good video. I have been trying to figure out for a few years why I seem to have an abnormal load on the foreguy. Everything is rigged with the original amel equipment and according to the manual. On setting the pole as instructed I have to "pump" the foreguy while taking in at the cleat or swing the pole out then raise the pole to its position with the topping lift. Either way there is considerable strain on the foreguy even before use. In 2020 after a very sedate crossing of the Atlantic I noticed that the pins on the shackles holding the forward guys in place were bent. I replaced the shackles with stronger ones and carried on. In 2022 and again in 2023 I was caught out and unable to get the poles in was running downwind in 25kts true wind. Both times even though the genoa was 50 % reefed the pole suddenly snapped back. The pole was never anywhere near the water and to my knowledge never back-winded. In any case being furled so much I doubt if back-winding would be a major problem. I just wondered if you had any idea or experience of similar. Thank you for all your valuable contributions to the owners group.

[@billkinney4794]

@@BobThomson-q2j Bob, I don’t understand how you can have an “abnormal load” on the foreguy before you set the sail if you follow the sequence in the manual. Let’s review the recommended sequence. 1. Attach control lines to pole. The afterguy, and the down haul are set at their marks. 2. Raise the pole with the topping lift to its mark. 3. Push the pole out, and pull it forward with the foreguy. When it comes tight on the afterguy it will be very close to the right spot. 4. Adjust the lines as needed to have the long pole be aligned with the jockey pole With that procedure the control lines can not be more than hand tight. Note that the marks might not be in EXACTLY the right spot. You might try starting with the marks set 6 inches out, and then adjust to get the pole correctly set. That might work better. If you trim the foreguy and aft guy hand tight BEFORE lifting the pole, that will severely overload both of those lines as the pole rises. Now comes a couple key points. First; For downwind sailing like this sheet tension should be relatively light. You want the upper 15% of the luff to be on the verge of luffing, in fact it should luff when the boat rolls. This greatly reduces rolling with the twin sail rig. Amel’s suggestion is to trim the clew of the sail to a meter forward of the pole. This only works if your sail is the same size as the original. Many replacement genoas made by sailmakers unfamiliar with Amel’s specifications are simply too small, and following that recommendation will result in a much over-tightened sheet and sail. Second: This is a light wind rig. It something people seem not to understand. This is not a flaw, any more than restricting a 1/2oz spinnaker to light winds is a flaw in sail design. In strong winds you don’t need a pole. the genoa will fly stably all by itself in anything over 15 TWS. If you try to use this pole setup with a genoa reefed significantly, and with high sheet loads, you will put excess aft-directed loads on the pole. The geometry dictates that. It’s not unique to the Amel pole setup, a standard whisker pole used on a jib significantly smaller than it was designed for would have the same problem. It is not appropriate to use poles in wind strengths that require the genoa to be reefed down to 50% of its original size. Hope that helps

[@BobThomson-q2j]

@@billkinney4794 thank you again Bill. Couple of new points well explained. Still leaves me with the unexplainable situation that pulling the pole forward that last 1 metre say is very difficult by oneself and putting the pole away in a strong breeze can also be challenging. I can only accept that pulling the pole forward and upwards by the foreguy with the weight of the genoa sheet requires more force than I think is normal but that is a personal opinion. Regards

[@svibissailingtheworld8840]

Fantastic!! so well thought out and done. great video! thank you BillK!

[@billkinney4794]

Thank you so much. Actual data and analysis is much better than name calling and arguing about what we THINK should be the right answer no matter what the facts say.

[@ChristianSloaneMD-j7d]

Very nice, Bill! Love it.

[@tilopeters6023]

Bill, your explanation is flawless and clear. It has brought up the question for me what did the previous owner encounter, and because I cannot be sure that the downwind poles were not backwinded or doused, I need to order new lines for the downwind rig even though they look relatively unused. I’ll save the old ones for backups.

[@billkinney4794]

Tilo, “Flawless” is a pretty high bar. I’ll happily take “pretty good”, and be happy with that. It was a lot of time to do the analysis and then put together a presentation that made it clear, so I appreciate the kind words.

[@peteramel]

Thanks Bill for a brilliant video

[@PerthHunter]

Great analysis Bill

[@JayPerrypersonal]

We had a back winding in 30 knots with a reefed genoa. Our block failed and exploded before the pole was pushed back half way towards the hull.

[@tilopeters6023]

Jay, that is another reason the Amel design is so good. That “point of failure” further protected the mast from side-loading. I don’t understand why people cite the attachment point of the block as a liability. I’m more of the school that it’s better to replace a block or a stanchion than a mast!

[@paulharries8262]

Great video. One question about the fore guy, I have read elsewhere that the material used for the fore guy should be different to the other lines and includes cotton. Is this correct? Could a case be made for introducing more elasticity into the fore guy arrangement particularly eith aging boats? I hope you consider making some more videos. Correct use of ballooner and mouse slong with how you upgraded your electricdl system would be great. An idiots guide to offshore fishing would be good too. If you create more videos of this quslity I am sure that Pattons will follow.

[@billkinney4794]

Paul, Thanks for the complements. In the Amel listing all the lines are the same "Tempest" material (except the topping lift). There is no "cotton" in any of these. That's kind of a strange idea, but I can understand where it might come from. The spun polyester used as the cover of this rope does have a very soft "hand" so somebody might imagine it was "cotton". Without thinking too hard about it, the kind of rope used for the other control lines is likely not all that important. I can't think of a scenario where the line type for the others would be critical, but that's not to say there cannot be one! The foreguy seems to be the critical issue. Bill

[@ullherweck9630]

Great video. Thank you Bill

[@sailwiththegales]

Thanks very much for this Bill. Love the way you explained it in simple terms for us non engineering types 😉 We live aboard the much smaller sister to the SM, Amel Sharki (39ft), and are learning to sail. It’s our first boat and we only started sailing about 3 yrs ago. We’ve yet to try the poles for downwind sailing. We did try rigging the massive Genoa sail onto one at anchor and it was guess work to be honest, we haven’t sailed with it yet. Your video makes me wonder if there is an Amel guideline for the Sharki also 🤔. I will have to enquire. Thanks again Deb

[@billkinney4794]

Deb, I don’t think Amel ever published a manual for the Sharki. I don’t know enough about the pole set on those to answer any detailed questions, but the Super Maramu manual might be a good place to start.

[@SlavkoDespotovic-f2u]

Great. It happened to me once. It was scary when pole moved and there was a loud noise when it banged to the side but that was all.

[@billkinney4794]

That is exactly the way it was designed, and that's the way it works. A good sailor works hard to avoid stressing his gear beyond normal limts, but it is nice to know if you take good care of your boat, it takes good care of you.

[@ojov]

Thank you bill. I appreciate the math here : simple and efficient. Fantastic contribution to the community. Just a question : it is still unclear to me whether it is recommended to systematically use both poles on a SM, or if having the sole Genoa with a pole is safe. Thank you

[@georgm4]

One important thing you forgot to mention. AMEL changed the user manual in 2004! “Don’t use pole and jockey pole on a single side. When the true wind is more than 15 knots, furl jib and ballooner together.” Sadly AMEL did not inform existing user about this imported change.

[@billkinney4794]

I did not mention it because it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the analysis I presented here. How to rig the poles as described in the this video DID NOT CHANGE. That's just not true. Other things did, and while there can be rational discussions about if they are important or not, but they are completely irrelevant to the discussion here. If you rig the poles incorrectly, you can collapse the mast even if you follow all the other recommendations about when to use them. That's my point. I want to be sure that people know there is a right way and a wrong way to rig their foreguy and they need to know why that is true backed up with good engineering analysis. Knowingly presenting the wrong way to rig the poles for flying the ballooner without understanding the consequences of the differences is irresponsible. This video presents why following the correct method is important. I stand by it, and why it is important for people with Amel's to know. If you have any argument that is actually about the analysis that is in the video, instead of someone else's uninformed ranting about it, I’d welcome the opportunity. If you are flying the ballooner with the two poles (as recommended) and you dip the pole in the water, or backwind either sail you better have your foreguy rigged correctly with the right kind of line you or you DO risk collapsing the mast. I think that is clear from the presentation. This red herring about 2004 manual changes keeps coming up. I do not understand why, or how it changes ANYTHING mentioned in this video. I think we can all agree that people can make more than one mistake while sailing. Which one of those mistakes were the exact proximate cause in any single unfortunate event is unknowable to me, and is not speculated about in here at all. I DO understand that Amel's recommendation has been to not use one pole. I know about it, every other Amel owner who keeps connected with the community and acceptes recommendations from others knows about it. My boat was built in 1996, I have known about these recommendations since I owned it. I take responsibility for knowing about my boat. The current versions of those manuals have been posted online in a forum that the people you are listening to were active in for many years. If they claim they did not see them, well... that's on them. If you can please point me to any analysis that explains WHY using one pole can collapse the mast under condition where two poles would not, I would appreciate it. I do not understand forces involved that would be mitigated with two poles, but I do not know everything.

[@echoaxle]

Didn’t Amel change the rigging manual at some point in time from their previous instruction manual for the SM?

[@billkinney4794]

I am not sure what the point is here. At the beginning of the production run back in 1989, there was no manual, per se from Amel. A new owner received training at the factory when they picked up the boat. That training was required and standard for every boat. The first edition of the manual was issued around the 2000 model year, and all the current versions have always been available on line, for as long as I have owned my boat, as well as all the knowledge contained in them. Over the course of nearly 30 years of production, Amel made many changes in the design and operating instructions for the Super Maramu. In some cases I know of, this resulted in mechanical retrofits to the gear on the boat to keep people from repeating the same stupid mistakes. The only person I know who has been whining about this was told by several knowledgable owners that his method of rigging was incorrect, and was against Amel's recommendations. His answer was, "I like my way better." He was NOT following the recommended rigging setup and was NOT using it according to the instructions that were published in ANY version of the manual. It is impossible for any manual writer to image ALL the ways people can do something wrong. If you are doing something that is NOT in the manual, all of the consequences are on YOU. You can't say, "But you didn't tell me NOT to do it my way!" It is one thing if the manual is clearly in error, and tells you to do something that is dangerous. That is not the case here. The pole was rigged with lines that were NOT configured as described in the manual and in a sail configuration that was also not described in the manual. This is documented in the comments on his YT channel--it is not hearsay. Then his mast falls down and he blames Amel for not telling him something he was told by others. I do appreciate his need to deflect blame to get his insurance payout, but the public blame game being played is at the very least disingenuous, if not deliberately misleading. His "how-to" videos have cost owners thousands of dollars in repairs they did not need to make.

[@samuaarnivuo4113]

So the over stretched foreguy (parallel to the boom) has 1100kg.. Why would that make backwinding force to be 1100kg? Isn't there's a (huge) lever in there at that point? I don't have the dimensions you are using, but with some guesses of dimensions, the backwinding force (normal to the boom) to cause the first calculation case is like something like 500kg. Thus it is a bit overkill to use 1100kg as normal force in the second analysis. Anyway, 3 tons of side force or 1.5 tons, doesn't matter. It's a metric f-ton of force in any case. Also, I might have missed a lot here, why is that pole joint at side of the boat and not at the mast? Did it buckle from that point?

[@billkinney4794]

Actually, the geometry WAS included in my calculations. At the point of maximum stretch, (when the load is highest) there is virtually no lever arm, since the pole at that point is essentially parallel with the stretched line. There is a joint in the pole essentially at the side of the mast. Unless the shrouds fail under load, that joint is not allowed any significant motion.

[@mbsmit]

Is it the same for a Sharki?

[@billkinney4794]

I am not as familiar with the details of the sharki's dimensions. For one I do not believe there are extra attachment points that can be confused with the right ones. But the basic geometry applies. What the original lines sizes and type that were used, I do not know.

[@rickfrancis4182]

Sorry to be late to the party. Just came across this older post, hope it's useful. Amel Sharki Tradewind Sailing ://kzbin.info/www/bejne/gn28oHWYmqyDjac . It's a short visual only but looks a very similar setup to the SM.

[@paulfitzgerald1466]

How is this better than a twistle rig?

[@billkinney4794]

Paul, Now there is a word I haven't heard in a long time... But The Amel downwind rig IS a "twizle" or twistle if you prefer. It seems a similar word never made it into the French sailing vocabulary, and so was never picked up by Amel. This kind of double headsail rig has of course be around since before the days of Joshua Slocum. Amel modernized it and made it practical for a larger boat with short handed crew. This will explain: fetchinketch.net/2016/06/26/amel-downwind-sailing-rig/ Amel's choice of a nylon sail for the "2nd genoa" was to make dousing a 750 sq foot sail practical for two people. A second dacron sail of that size would be a hand full and a storage hassle. The ability to roll up the two sails on the same foil means in a tradewind squall there is no need for a mad scramble to get sail down. The only real performance difference is that the rig set on traditional whisker poles can be trimmed to a wider angle because you can rotate poles off of perpendicular, and therefore the sails as well. I don't see that as a huge advantage, since there are sail plans much faster and easier to handle once you come up to 150TWA

[@paulfitzgerald1466]

@@billkinney4794 thanks for the reply, my understanding of the twistle rig is that the inboard ends of the poles are on a free floating attachment, not on the mast, so there is no loading from the poles to the mast. As far as furling goes, self furling foils generally have two tracks, so if the second jib is hoisted on its own track, it can be easily furled in a squall. In addition, it is possible to have one jib set inside the other for reaching and pointing if the whole rig has to be changed suddenly. I really can’t see the benefits of the Amel rig over the twistle rig.

[@billkinney4794]

You are wrong about the rig you describe. It can not be furled on a foil. If you hoist a second sail on the same track, and leave the halyard up there, you will have a halyard wrap. Think about it.

[@paulfitzgerald1466]

@@billkinney4794 thanks, good point, explains why the articles I have seen suggested sewing two old jibs together at the luff, and on another they left both jibs up all the way across the Atlantic. I will have a stern word with myself about thinking things through …

[@billkinney4794]

@@paulfitzgerald1466 Like all sailing rigs, each has its pluses and minuses. No one is "best" for every sailor, every boat, or every voyage. We find Amel's rig is practical and comfortable downwind even with a boat where that involves over 1400 sq feet of sail. Having used other twin headsail setups, I am happy to trade off the ability to use it on a boat of this size for the reduced flexibility it offers. So in answer to your original question, "Is it better?" the answer has to be, Yes and No. :)

[@χχάάοοςς]

Special procedures have only one purpose; to overcome bad design. Puts Amel right in line with Boeing. Thanks but no thanks.

[@billkinney4794]

It sounds like you are suggesting that you can rig something any way you like, ignore the engineering built into the system, and still expect it to work. You are, of course, free to believe that, but very few people would agree with you. It sounds like you are suggesting that not following documented rigging procedures has been the cause of recent problems, and that any design should be able to be rigged in any way the operator desires and still be safe and effective. Excuse me if I respectfully disagree. As an engineer I know that the first rule is to RTFM. Anyone is perfectly free to make up their own way of doing things and ignore documented procedures. If things then go pear-shaped they should then be an adult and take responsibility for their own actions and recognize they might not know as much as they thought. It's especially important that rigging procedures outside of manufacture's recommendations NOT be spread to people who might think they come from a knowledgable and authoritative source. The manual and other documentation from Amel is very clear on the right way to do this. It seems to me any OTHER procedure would be the one that should be characterized as "special". And what does Boeing have to do with anything? Who mentioned them?

[@tilopeters6023]

How is this a “special” procedure?? If it is stipulated by the manufacturer, this is a standard procedure. Just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t make it special.

[@MultiBmorgan]

I don't own an amel, but this information while good, was not supplied in earlier manuals of many models of Amels and from what ive read and heard no attempt was made by Abel in any shape or form to update their owners ( this great video withstanding,) was ever made. When so much money is involved...well....you know the story.😢

[@billkinney4794]

@MultiBmorgan I know that is what is being claimed. You are being fed a load of misleading information from a biased source. When this boat in question posted a video about a year ago on how to use the poles, they were told by many Amel owners that the rigging was wrong. The comment back to one of them was: "I like my way better." Look at the comments on that youtube posting at the time for the real story, assuming they haven't been deleted by now. He was told off line that it was wrong. He liked his way better. HIS way. Blaming Amel for his problems is disingenuous, at the best.. My boat was built in 1996. Before Amel even wrote manuals. I knew the right way to rig the poles. Every other Amel owner knew. The correct information was out there and available. Not only did he ignore it, he was dismissive of advice to the contrary. Did you know that? He liked his way better, now he choses to blames others for the consequences of his choices. But the real damage is to people who see his videos and think he knows what he is talking about. People following his advice will end up in the same place as him through no fault of their own.

[@MultiBmorgan]

@@billkinney4794 Thank You. I understand. I suppose im just skeptical of large companies and their interests. I surely hope you're correct : you seem very knowledgeable.