We now have a sock for our cruising chute on Arenaria, Parker 325. However, it comes with a strop about 30cm long which means the sail doesn't go as far up the mast as previously - see picture. On looking up the mast the spinnaker halyard seems to come over the sheave and then be directed down to go through a loop immediately above the genoa halyard before being attached to the head of the sail. Does anyone know why this redirection is necessary - forces perhaps? - and whether we can just use the halyard straight from the sheave to give us the extra distance we now need. It would also give more space between the two halyards which would reduce the chance of trapping the spinnaker halyard in the genoa as we try to furl it, which has happened a couple of times.
Spinnaker - genoa sheaves.jpg

Click to View Image9 View(s)

Hello Dennis and Anne,
This looks a very similar to Nosey's. Attached are a couple of pictures of the old Z-spars curler arrangement. I'll have look and see how different the Harken arrangement is. You can see the arrangement to keep the (blue) jib halyard away from the furler; perhaps the loop for the speckled red spinnaker halyard is
Z-Spars Halyard Spacer 6.jpg

Click to View Image2 View(s)

Z-Spars Halyard Spacer 2.jpg

Click to View Image3 View(s)

to direct angle from the mast. Otherwise the sheaves might be too close, and there is a lot of clutter around that area. I must admit when my mast was down having the standing rig replaced I found a lot of things that I didn't think were quite right ...
Nosey - Parker 325-26
Hi all

Blue Moon has a similar arrangement. The purpose of the ring (I am told) is to reduce wear on the spinnaker sheave from sideways forces. On Mya my SuperSeal the sheave was much higher up the mast so that the ring could be well above the forestay. Dare I suggest some cost saving measures on this later version?

I have often wondered about ignoring the ring and replacing the sheave every few years when it wears out, but never quite had the courage.

Peter Dann
Blue Moon 325/32
Yes, the arrangement is unchanged with my Harken set-up. Peter's explanation sounds spot on; it ensures a force tranversely in line with the sheave. If it ain't broke don't fix it.
In my copious spare time I might wander around our marina and look at other set-ups ...
Nosey - Parker 325-26
A further thought occurred to me whilst up the mast re-reeving a mousing line which had jumped the masthead sheave (lovely views of the Liverpool Waterfront but I would rather have paid £10 to go on the Ferris Wheel)...

The issue with the ring is not so much height as proximity to the upper swivel on the genoa: I would love to set the assymetric with the genoa still up as it offers a useful blanket, but am scared that furling it would trap the snuffer sock. And I would rather not have to replace the kite halyard sheave every few years. So perhaps the answer is to run the halyard through a low friction bullseye lashed to the front of the stainless ring? This would ensure decent clearance from the swivel but still maintain a straight pull from the sheave.

When the blisters from the descender have healed I might just have another go up the mast and see if I can (literally) lash something up.
Peter Dann
Blue Moon 325/32
Hmm. I take the point about leaving the genoa up to help blanket the Code 0 - I do the same with the spinnaker - but perhaps working out a system that avoids the possibility of snagging the sock? I wonder of easing away the spinnaker halyard would take the snuffer far enough away from the furler?

I sympathise with the mousing line; when I bought Nosey I replaced the running rigging. The new halyards have, as I think is common these days, the last few cms of the core removed and the outer sheath folded back to make a small eye. The idea is of course to accept a mousing line, but I've heard of problems such as you've described, so I sewed little loops onto the end of the superseded halyards, and those are my mousing lines.
Except that that wretched spinnaker sheave was too small to accept the slightly larger profile of the eye on my spinnaker halyard, so I had to cut off the loop. Leaving aside the fact that the sheave was a mm too large for the slot, so it was riveted to a couple of spacers ... When I replaced the sheave (mast down) I simply took off a few mm so it fitted.

I'm impressed with the mast ascending - hope the blisters heal soon.
Nosey - Parker 325-26
The problem of a spinaker halyard being too close to the top of the genoa furler is also known from other sailboats. This subject is currently debated on the Dutch Zeilersforum.
I copy the solution from IlCigno (a very active and ingenious sailor) at his Compromis 888. He had the crane-like solution fabricated by a local company.
It works flawless since 10 years for his furling Code 0.


Click to View Image6 View(s)


Click to View Image5 View(s)


Click to View Image5 View(s)

Thanks Dirk - an interesting solution.
Nosey - Parker 325-26
Hi John,
Looking at the photo of the terminal-shroud connection it looks as if it is bend. Can you verify this? If so, it may be(come) a weak spot.
The solution I showed to take the spinaker/code 0 halyard further from the mast appears to be a standard available mast step