Hey Mike,
No problem, you just have to be ten feet tall!
Well, not really. You climb up on the mast at the base and stand there and reach up and aft to the shroud lever and open the lever and pull the extension pin. Then climb back down to the lower hull and pull on the righting line and up the boat comes.
As to the captive mast step housing and ball: Get those parts from Aquarius Sails and adapt them to your present system.... OR ,,, Before you extend the upper shroud, tie a short piece of line tightly connecting an eye strap located at or near the bottom of the mast to the main beam. It is just a short piece of line going through the eye strap and around and under the main beam. Pull it tight and tie a square knot. This loop will keep a non-captive mast step connected. Then extend the shroud and right the boat. No problem. I have helped several sailors rig other brands of boats this way. Some boat owners have even installed a cleat on the bottom of the main beam to eliminate the need for the square knot.
Opening the leeward shroud lever is a "go fast" in light air downwind in that it allows much more mast rotation. It takes the tension out of the leeward shroud and then the mast can push it out of the way and rotate much more.
Good Sailing,
Bill
That is no reason to not voice an opinion, especially when this thread has changed into a discussion about the decline and politics in the T-class (and general sailing).
I have sailed Tornados for just four years now, but we have never had any problems righting it with an ordinary righting line thrown over the hull. Not even when sailing with a crew weight of 150 Kg. I have even seen a 160kgs team right a pitchpoled T (before it went turtle).
Besides, as Roland Gaebler said "we are not sailing these boats to be safe" 
I've seen my Tornado with aluminum mast righted single-handed with a 6' righting pole. (Pictures at http:/
I've seen my Tornado with aluminum mast righted single-handed with a 6' righting pole. (Pictures at http:/
need a login to access that.....
I think we can trust Marstom to come with a good top quality mast with longlivitey.
Wouter
It seems apparent that Bill isn't in favour of most anything that he hasn't "incorporated" whithin his boats, but that doesn't mean that other innovations are not good.
Carbon is the way that ALL boats are going, LIKE IT OR NOT. It is similar to the transision from marine ply as the favoured building material for most if not all the high performance sailing craft of that time, to fibre reinforced plastic (polyester and E glass). There were all sorts of "wild" reasons given that fibreglass would NEVER replace ply. To heavy, to slow, to expensive, and UNSAFE, were just a few emotional "reasons" that were given at the time, (sound a little familiar?). Well, we are at just such a watershed in the development of "the next generation" of building materials right here right now, and nothing is surer than over the next few years "if it aint carbon/kevlar, then it aint there"
There is a load of conjecture and, I may say "Rubbish" being bandied about the diameter, the comparison to aluminium, the comparisons to "wind surfers" wall thickness etc, for the Tornado carbon mast. You only have to look to a class that is more appropriate that successfully converted to carbon masts years ago without "reducing" diameters etc, and is growing (as a class) more now than at any time in their history. The A class is the example that Tornado's should be looking to for validation of their decision to move forward into carbon masts.
Probably flogging a dead horse here, but..
Mitch Boot and Darren Bundock has made some statements regardring the last ballot..
Ref: The German T Assoc (in english)
Rolf,
Can you post a copy of these comments here (and/or on the TornadoCat forum on Yahoo)? The link you provided is all in German and it's not obvious (to me at least) where to go to get to the comments.
Mike.
Can you post a copy of these comments here (and/or on the TornadoCat forum on Yahoo)? The link you provided is all in German and it's not obvious (to me at least) where to go to get to the comments.
Sorry about that Mike!
In the meantime, the posts has 'disappeared' from the german forum (as controversial posts has a tendency to do there from time to time). Both posts was forwarded from them, and written in english. The next time I will post them here instead..
The basis was that both Mitch Booth and Darren Bundock supported the ballot to further the 'one-design' element in the Tornado class. Mitch eleborated, as mentioned here, that the boat/equipment was just 1/3 of the cost of a campaign. The rest went into travelling, hotels and coaching..
Here is the post in question
Tornado New Rules von Mitch Booth
Autor: Flippo
Datum: 09.09.04 12:43
Dear Tornado Sailors,
Finally, after 5 months of full on sailing I now have a chance to comment on the ballot and its impact.
The pre-text to the ballot form and so called intention of what the ballot was trying to achieve is far from what the class started as many years ago.
The class has always allowed and still does permit owner builders to build 1 boat a year for their own use. Many sailors from all levels have exercised this right to make part or full boats. We have made over the years hulls, rudders, centerboards, sails, booms and even masts.
I am a strong supporter of the one design concept however, there is a big difference between "one design "and "one manufacturer". This whole idea that no sailor should be able to use something that is not commercially available to other sailors is totally against the spirit of the class rules. We have strict tolerances, materials and rules to abide by and we can make them even tighter if we want.
The point I am trying to make is if the class wants to go towards the commercially available and same equipment for all sailors then we have to scrap the owner builder rule and change the class to a "manufacturer supplied only" rule just like Hobie or Nacra. Personally I think this would damage the future of the class and it would lose its edge as the leading beach cat.
There are two major flaws I find in the ballot.
Firstly, under the current rules 3, d, an amateur builder is allowed to build a boat a year for his own use. This of course includes a mast if he wishes.
Secondly, the rule 17b, 1 and 2 talks about "Schedule A- approved sailcloth" However there is no wording as to the criteria , method or persons to create this list. We have earlier this year gone through a rule interpretation on spinnaker cloth and it was clear from ISAF that no matter how much supporting correspondence as to the intention they would ONLY rely on the wording of the rule. I believe the new rule is not enforceable in its current form.
Good Sailing,
Mitch Booth
Auf diesen Beitrag antworten
Re: Tornado New Rules von Bundy
Autor: Flippo
Datum: 09.09.04 12:45
I agree that the class should remain one design and not one manufacture to encourage a little bit of development. However, the class must put in place some steps to prevent the class becoming elitist.
The circumstances have changed over the years since the class started many years ago, now many teams are professional sailors, some MNA's are pouring in exorbitant amounts of money and the amount of sponsorship money in the class has risen substancially. Something needs to be done to level the playing field to low budget teams.
I believe the class has taken some positive steps in this direction.
I don’t see it damaging as at this stage the carbon mast is the only part to be strict one design and one manufacture. If it passes the ballot with a greater than 2/3 majority then it is what the class is wanting.
You are correct that a amateur builder can still build one mast a year for his own use. Only 1 not a practice one and then a real one. I believe it must also come out of an ISAF certified mould as well.
I am unclear on the wording of the new 17b, as I do not have it here with me. But for sure it needs to have clear guidelines for selection of material to get approval to be listed on "schedule A".
I have confidence that the ISAF will approve something that is fair and binding.
Regards
Bundy
I don't interpret those posts as very supportive of the carbon mast - both of them point out conflicts in the new rule and Booth points out how this rule seems to contradict the nature of the class.
Jake: I'm reading their statements as supportive of the carbon mast, but they are obviously concerned about the direction of the T-class.
I might be totally wrong of course, but as english is not my native language, I have an excuse ready
Good thing that Steve had the postings at hand tough!
My interpretation is that while they didn't exactly come out and say "We don't like it", Booth is illuding that the class seems to be migrating to a single manufacturer one-design (like I've been saying) and getting away from the multi-manufacturer one-design that the Tornado class has always been. He feels that this is bad for the class. Having only one supplier of the carbon masts is clearly a move toward a single manufacturer one-design.
Bundy, on the other hand, seems slightly less opposed to the decision and while he agrees with Booth's multi manufacturer one-design ideas, he doesn't think the carbon fiber mast decision will be damaging to the class. Actually, neither seem to be against the carbon fiber mast but rather the idea that they are legally only available from Marstrom.
Well, this restriction is supposed to be for 2 years only...then other manufacturers are permitted, assuming they can get certified and pay a royalty to Marstrom. I guess it will come down to...can anyone else build a better/cheaper mast than Marstrom and make enough profit to commit to it.
And after the royalty too. Does anyone believe that there can ever be a second manufacturer in this scenario? I don't.
This is interesting to me because we just had a similar discussion this weekend regarding F18 and one design. A minority of our area F18 sailors (actually just one of them) is concerned that departing from Hobie Tiger class rules and opening up to F18 (since the recent insurgence of the Nacra F18 in the area) would be detrimental due to the arms race. The majority concensus was that it would be healthy to start considering ourselves full on F18 and forget about one manufacturer one design. I think the argument is Moo since evidence suggests outside manufacturer sails are actually cheaper than Hobie or Nacra.
(By the way, the point is "Moo" because who would listen to a cow's opinion? 
)
Well Jake on the "UDDER HAND"????