Has anybody taken the time to measure all the strings in a Winder, for replacement purposes? No, I'm not volunteering, just asking.

I've never measured mine.

I work off 10m for each control line or 15 if it's continuous.

140m?

The 140m, does that include the burgee hayliard

140m - now that is seriously 'one-stringing'!

It depends how you measure that string... A piece of string can be infinate in length

In that case it would not be infinite in 'length' as it would have no 'length' per se, it would just 'be'.

Can I assume that the answer to my original question is 'no'.

Infinite metric or infinite Imperial?

Ah, that would depend if the rope was from a European or American source. I have heard that the Americans are switching to the metric system. They are doing it inch by inch.

In similar vein have you noticed how much faster you go in km/h compared to mph but how much further everything seems to be on the continent when they use those metric miles.  If we had the right combination I'm sure we could get there much faster.

Seems no-one knows.

I recall in the past on this forum the question of halyard lengths has been answered, but control lines not mentioned.

Next time you (anyone) replace a rope on your boat, presumably you'll measure it before going to the chandlers, so drop me an email and I'll compile a table...gradually...

twice as long from middle to end!

The famous question "How long is a piece of string?" is traditionally regarded 
as rhetorical rather than seeking an answer. It's a question often asked to 
parallel the unanswerability of another question. For example:
First person: "However long are they going to take to get all this sorted out?"
Second person: "How long's a piece of string?!"
...which means, in effect, "the question is about as answerable as a question 
about the precise length of pieces of string in general".
It's interesting, because the length of any specific piece of string is directly 
measurable, whereas in the general case it's indeterminate because of the wide 
range of non-standard lengths of pieces of string.
I am often asked questions of an unusual nature, and I pride myself on my 
ability to answer and to explain things which people can understand. If I hear 
someone happen to say in conversation "how high's the moon?", I am tempted to 
comment that it's about a quarter of a million miles. But occasionally I have 
heard "How long's a piece of string?", and before noticing the question is 
rhetorical I am ready to give a brave attempt at answering the question!
Although it may seem initially unanswerable, there are some facts which help to 
solve the question. For a start, a piece of string can't really be less than a 
quarter of an inch or it's not "a piece of string" but more of a small sample 
from some string. Similarly, any string longer than about 100ft isn't usually 
classed as "a piece" of string, as it's more obviously a reel of string. In 
fact, for any string to be A PIECE of string, it tends to be a typical length. 
Pieces of string are typically in their second or subsequent use, and have 
previously been used in some application such as wrapping up a parcel or tying 
two things together. As a result, the typical piece of string is in the range of 
1ft to 8ft, and if you were going to place a gambling spread-bet of some type, 
you'd be best to go for a string length of about 3ft 6in or thereabouts.
In a more mathematically factual answer, I'd say that the length of a piece of 
string has a spread distribution of probability of a continuous function with a 
graph... well I could imagine the type of thing, with string length along the X 
axis and likeliness along the Y axis, and a curve which starts low and builds up 
and then levels off gradually. If someone was so inclined they could put out a 
request for pieces of string and then measure them and plot the results, which 
would give a graph somewhat similar to the type of thing I can guess.
It's not easy to express such an answer to the question "how long is a piece of 
string" as a direct word-based answer, but a good approximation would be: "the 
length of a piece of string is usually about 4ft +/- 3ft".
Of course it's not a perfect answer, and the distribution would have a 
characteristic which is spread differentially either side of the most likely 
length. This type of thing is not as uncommon as you might think, for example 
electronic components are specified as their nominal value +/- 10% or 20%, and 
colloquial terms such as "faster than a speeding bullet" have an element of 
expressiveness which often convey more than the statistical figure.
Anyone care for a thesis? 1. Collect random pieces of string in a university 
string donations box. 2. produce a statistical survey. 3. profit?

The only flaw in that otherwise excellent proposal is the assumption that the inhabitants of Universities would willingly part with pieces of string which are of a useful length. The employees of Universities are alleged to be experts at saving string as a drive for greater economy, and the students may have difficulty in identifying anything which exists outside of cyberspace.

The donations to the box may actually not be representative of the length of string, but would represent samples of useless lengths of string.

Many detractors criticize string theory as it has not provided quantitative experimental predictions. Like any other quantum theory of gravity, it is widely believed that testing the theory directly would require prohibitively expensive feats of engineering. Whether there are stringent indirect tests of the theory is unknown.
String theory is of interest to many physicists because it requires new mathematical and physical ideas to mesh together its very different mathematical formulations. One of the most inclusive of these is the 11-dimensional M-theory,which requires spacetime to have eleven dimensions,[2] as opposed to the usual three spatial dimensions and the fourth dimension of time. The original string 
theories from the 1980s describe special cases of M-theory where the eleventh dimension is a very small circle or a line, and if these formulations are considered as fundamental, then string theory requires ten dimensions. But the theory also describes universes like ours, with four observable spacetime dimensions, as well as universes with up to 10 flat space dimensions, and also cases where the position in some of the dimensions is not described by a real 
number, but by a completely different type of mathematical quantity. So the notion of spacetime dimension is not fixed in string theory: it is best thought of as different in different circumstances.

I Just love this website, I learn sooo much, string theory etc... However as the recent program on Auntie Beeb, with Alan Davies (that well known brainbox!!) it shows all strings are infinite.....

And then of course there's the so-called string rule (RRS 28.1) which limits the number of pieces of string to one and says it must be taut. At least that's what I think it says.

Just out of interest, are we talking here of another set of numbers similar conceptually to imaginary numbers, so hence the number squared would be i or multiples of it?

A little distance from sailing.

In response to mr smart arse, you have obviously spent a good deal of time studying the subject. Yet i am afraid that you are a little out on your judgement of string. 

Simply put, a piece of string does not have a length of its own. You give it a length when measuring it. To measure the length of a piece of string exactly is pretty much impossible. If you were to cut some off a reel, there would be nobody who could provide you with an answer to the length. The reason for this is the level of precision to which it is measured. To explain this i will provide an example of relative nature: 

The coastline of the uk on a map at 1-25,000 scale would be length "X" if you used a ruler to carefully measure all of the little details. However, if it were to be measured in the same way using a piece of string to get into all of the little contours more succesfully, your answer may even amount to 2X due to the increased precision of the device used to measure. 

Taken to the string, if a ruler measured the string, it may be 2 feet long, yet an electron microscope may come up with an answer millions of times greater. 

The answer i would give to the string length question is that wes simply dont know.

After reading Alistairs post, I have carried out exhaustive studies in my club of how string follows contours - it does do it extremely well and I'm told it allows exceptional freedom of movement too.  My attempts to measure the strings in situ were not well received, but I'm sure Chris is right.

Twice half it's length, as a smart arse friend of mine at work pointed out!

Alistair

Give David Winder a phone 01535 604980

He is very helpful, keeps records of the lengths used in each boat built, can supply replacements, dispatches promptly & his prices are reasonable too.

Charlie, you are, indeed, the voice of sanity and reason! I was hoping to avoid pestering 'the man' but that may be the only way if the only other help available from this forum is the ramblings of the clinically befuddled who seem to have gained access to the computer whilst Nursie had her back turned!

Surely Dave won't mind being pestered by a man holding folding green stuff and a need for 140m of string?

having studied this extreemly useful topic I now know why I failed so miseraby to win many prizes 30 years ago - were there postings that I missed in the 80's

I find it very amusing to think how this forum would have been in the 80s! Good idea Stuart - perhaps we should start one. Then people can post about:
* Nearest place to buy Cascamite
* Latest rumour: loose-footed mainsail in development
* Jib sheets catching on mast strut
* New quadrant levers for sale

When you asked about the length of string, would that of included the elastic?

Careful with this one, don't measure it on the boat under load - it'll be longer - wouldn't want to go overboard on having too much elastic unless you need some to keep the old wool socks up in this cold weather.

Jon, that would have been a whole new topic!

'Wise man never post on forum after more than two pints!'

I was disappointed that Oliver Board's post has just been cut and pasted, as I was hoping to get something back from someone who actually understood string theory.  Anyway, if we can get Merlin shrouds to vibrate in another dimension perpendicular to the 3 existing spatial ones there might be a speed advantage, who knows?

Don't get your hopes up Andrew! When considering issues of the nature of matter, string theory and quantum reality, it is widely held that the act of measuring something actually alters it. Thus, if a Merlin is determined as being 14 feet in length, it is only really 14 feet long when it is being measured and that, when it is not being measured, it can be something different, if indeed it exists at all. The recently proposed addition of winged rudders would have created a Merlin which could have appeared longer than 14 feet when it was not being measured, unless it was being measured whilst under way, in which case the act of measuring it would surely have affected the results. The AGM decided to remove this quantum anomaly in an attempt to reduce the number of possible universes, each of which could, of course, have had a Merlin of different hull shape. Your suggestion that we explore matters of multiple dimensions and their attendant multiple universes in order to seek to have our shrouds vibrating in any of the several different dimensions necessary to string theory would cause a measurement nightmare which could result in poor Measurement Man going grey and hairless (!). However, one other interesting aspect of this is that it is also frequently postulated in the field of quantum reality that something does not exist unless it is actually being observed. Perhaps some might try to suggest that a winged rudder that is not being observed when it is under the water, might not, at that moment, exist. A winged rudder that does not exist could not be said to be contravening the rules (which also only exist when you are reading them). We should not forget that the Merlin is only a restricted development class and that any move to take advantage of particle physics would lead to prohibitively expensive development costs and would quite rightly be banned.
I think I might need a lie down now but the problem is that if I look at the sofa before I lie on it, I might change its dimensions but I am not sure that it will even exist if I am not actually observing it.....Come to think of it, I can't even really be sure that I exist.......Cogito ergo sum.

Very very good Richard.

Our shrouds were vibrating up the beats at Parkstone, 'cause I couldn't get any more shroud tension on. It didn't feel quick.

What about that bloke Shroedinger, and his cat.....  did it die or not?

Yes and yes. That is the problem - and the answer (in all probability!)

Indeed some Merlins are known to demonstrate this effect clearly by being both OCS and not at the same time.

Yes exactly, not OCS until they are observed, until then, it would only be a probability hoho

That might also lead to the possibility of multiple universes, one in which the boat was observed to be OCS, and another in which it wasn't

Blimey!

Anybody got an answer to the original question?
How long (for replacement purposes) should the strings on a Winder be?

Especially: 
Kicker control
Centreboard up / down
Rig forward
Rig back.

And, following a different post, which rope / thickness is normal? Which rope is best?
Is it this one: http://www.marlowropes.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=80:excel-control&catid=51:dinghy-windsurfing&Itemid=249

Marlow control looks good if you only have two controls or don't mind having only two colours.  It would be bad enough on my hog stepped NSM4 where I have five controls led back, let alone a Winder.

This seems an incredible limitation.

"only two colours"

Ah yes - but you can add coloured balls!
And when you run out of single colours - you add another ball (should give enough permutations even for a Winder)

Colin

....I thought the whole point was that a winder only had ONE string (of undefined length) - why have more than one colour!

Balls? Only useful if you always take hold of the end of a bit of rope. Not much good for grabbing near the cleat.

Useless if your crew is colour blind!

As measured this morning:
Winder continuous kicker: 15metres.
Winder centreboard up / down cntrols to the side deck: 2 sets of 5 metres each.