: Bill,
: I don't doubt the "typical" evaluation but this is a
: specific example. Apparently no centerboard/leeboard, kayak hull
: shape which in a sea kayak may not turn easily ("strong
: tracking"). All I am trying to say is this specific usage
: probably should be given the benefit of a doubt. Not a person on
: this forum has experienced the 100's of years of schooner
: development, but as far as I know most schooners are much bigger
: with different hulls. Looking at the sails and their size (tiny)
: relative to the spacing -large, would indicate the upwind
: inteference between sails should be less. Any kayak with no
: centerboard probably excells at reaching - just like the
: historical boats. Wing and Wing should keep the sails from
: blanketing each other, assuming the rigging allows it.

: One thing to remember about the comparison to historical schooners,
: is that these sails are 100th the size compared to the hull.
: Since there is no outrigger, that should probably be expected
: due to lack of righting moment.

The advantage of using a split rig, a ketch is probably a better choice than the schooner btw, is it keeps the center of effort down close to the deck. But realistically unless you have outriggers of some sort or a very wide kayak or have some means of hiking out over the side, having only one sheet to handle will be a blessing. I spent years sailing a narrow sailing canoe, it's really nice to be able to quickly dump the wind pressure from a gust with such a skinny boat. Would be much more difficult with 3 (or more) sheets and would likely result in a capsize.

Bill H.