Spinnaker Halyard Rigging

[Deleted]

Calling any SO379 owners with a spinnaker halyard fitted by the Jeanneau factory?

EVENSTAR's halyard was fitted by a local rigger; the halyard hoists a 'Karver Top Down Furler' torsion rope, which requires a high tension for a good spinnaker furl. In modest winds (<15kt) the halyard sheave pulled out of the Selden mast.
I guess the halyard will have to be led through a block or deflector to reduce the load on the sheave?

Photo shows only a (vertical) eye below the sheave. What do Jeanneau fit to that eye? Clearly any block would have to be very close to the mast to take the load on the halyard; or do they use a 'halyard deflector' fitting?

Selden (UK) told me to ask Jeanneau!; I am waiting for a reply from the factory.
Any advice from Jeanneau owners on rigging the spinnaker halyard will be much appreciated - thanks.

[JEF]

Hi Gerry

Hope you are well .... 

Intresting I have often thought about the loading on this sleave ... all the 379s I have seen to date X4 including my yacht have been rigged in the same way as your attached photo for use with a non furling cruising chute. I have not seen a French or UK rigged yacht with a factory code zero set up, intrested to find out if they do use the vertical eye in some way as fitted by Selden and how that is done.


Personnaly I cannot see how this can be effectively rigged to distribute loading .. but then I am not an expert. Surely the mast manufacturer Selden must know the correct rig configuration to support the loadings of your furling torque rope. 

Sorry not much help ... but if it has happened to you the concern could this happen to other yachts rigged in the same way?

[Tafika II]

Jerry,
My gennaker halyard is setup the same as your picture. I am using a Selden top down system. I doubt the eye is necessary to the rig, even it it was vertical in it's orientation. My rigger stated the setup as shown in your photo is right with the stress on the halyard, fittings and sprint. Not sure if that helps, but there my 2 cents.
If you are interested in my setup, there is an article in Hints & Tips. The link is Bowsprit & roller furling SO42DS

[jdl01]

Hello Jerry,
I have been running for three seasons with the same set up as you show in the photo but flying a code 0 which does not have the upper sail area loading of a gennaker. Basically the exit box is not designed for lateral loading - such as you get with a gennaker while beam or closer reaching. Our 379 came with a 1/2" loose braided, 2 in 1 halyard with some stretch in it. This seems to have eased the point load with our code 0 on the exit box shiv. Given that we both have a 4 point vertical padeye immediately below the exit box, I would suggest a high strength alloy bullseye secured with a dyneema attachment. This will lie close to the mast and not gilcock, and has no mechanical parts. This should significantly reduce lateral loading on the exit box and you may also want to go for the bigger diameter, softer halyard. Hopefully your no twist furling hoist is short enough to allow this modification. I'm considering a furling genneaker, so please let me know how you fare.
Jim

[MartyB]

My brain eye says that loop should be on top of the internal sheave, to you can put an external sheave above it, then lead the halyard to the internal sheave. My mast head rig has a loop at the top, where I have a sheave, then lead to halyard to the internal sheave to come down inside the mast.

marty

[jdl01]

Hi Marty,
I agree with you if one wants to put four more holes in the mast for another pad eye
Jim

[MartyB]

Oct 30, 2014 23:19:04 GMT jdl01 said:

Hi Marty,
I agree with you if one wants to put four more holes in the mast for another pad eye
Jim

I'd do it without thinking twice, much less once! or three times......OUCH! dang nabbit, need to quit thinking, hurts the brain electron!

Or better yet, put a loop at the mast head, then you have another 2-4' of halyard height, and more area, so faster down wind yet!


marty

[Deleted]

Thanks all.

Whilst I think I can see the advantage of Marty's suggestion, as a believer in the KISS principle, then unless I hear from Jeanneau with their rigging method, I'll go with Jim's (jdl01) bullseye.

Thanks Jim - lashing the Lead Ring (pic) to the padeye should control the halyard nicely and eliminate sideloads on the sheave. We were indeed on a close reach when the sheave pulled out of the mast.
I will report when I have some experience with the new rig.

RE Top Down Furling; in a word - brilliant!
That said, there is quite a learning curve; particularly in controlling the sail as it furls.
It is essential to prevent the lower half furling before the top is done - if that happens the sail will not unfurl next time. There is a clue in the name! Lots of advice on the web.
Still very expensive kit, but superb for shorthanded / singlehanded work.

[simon379]

Really useful posts - I've just acquired a Karver furling system and sail (which is excellent!) for my SO379. I hadn't spotted this potential issue, I'll stay away from too much load on a beam reach until I can get up the mast. It would be nice to fix this with a swivel head block, but as you say the geometry probably won't allow this.
Many thanks,
Simon

[Deleted]

Before rigging a 'Lead Ring' to the padeye (photo in OP), are there any 379 people in the Group who ordered the Jeanneau "Rig for Assymetric Spinnaker"; ie. can anyone tell me what the Factory fit to that padeye?

Selden are not interested (can you believe that!) saying that Jeanneau fit their own spinnaker pack.
I'm still hopeful for a reply from the Factory - but not holding my breath.

So, can anyone tell me how Jeanneau rig the 379 spinnaker halyard for an assymetric? Thanks.

[Don Reaves]

I don't have a spinnaker, so I cannot answer from experience. But my SO35 has a fitting just like this. In the owners manual, it's described as the spinnaker pole lift halyard sheave. Just below it, on one side of the mast is a slot labeled as the spinnaker halyard exit. At the top of the mast, there is a stainless steel plate with holes on the forward side for attaching a swivel block for the halyard. This arrangement is shown for both the standard and roller furling masts.

Are there any other such attachment points on your mast? I'm sure the loading on the pole topping lift is far less than on the spinnaker halyard, and it may be that the sheave you're using wasn't designed for such high loads.

Don

[On y va]

This sort of rigging is ofcourse and obviously not exclusive to Jeanneau. But, yes, on the eye, there has to be a block fitted, through which you run your spinnaker halyward. As this block can follow the halyard (and the load), whereas the sheave cannot, hence it got pulled out. I recommend a block on a spring, so it cannot collapse.

But, it is also much better for the load on the top end of the mast. So, easy really: just fit a good quality block (not too big) and run your halyward through that and hey presto!

[J349er]

The eye is to attach a 2:1 when using a furler that requires more tension such as Selden CX for Code zero sails.

[Deleted]

Update 1:
We received instructions from Jeanneau to rig a block & spring on the padeye (see photo).
Clearly no help - the block takes none of the halyard load.

Jeanneau then suggested rigging the halyard with a 2:1 purchase; all very well, but that would mean an extra 16m of halyard!
(to stow in cockpit / or all that windage when parked - ie. attached to the deck).
We may have to go for the 2:1, but hoping the new lead eye will suffice (see below).
See Update 2 next:




Attachment Deleted

[Deleted]

Update 2:

So we have lashed a 14mm lead ring to the padeye (see photo).



Attachment Deleted
We hope that the ring will take some of the halyard load and eliminate sideways forces on the sheave.

[captbillh]

The following Selden PDF shows a proper 2:1 Code 0 halyard hoist:

www.seldenmast.com/files/1412941987/597-200-E.pdf

[On y va]

Yes, now I get the picture. I was under the impression that we were talking about spinnakers here, for which the loads are not that dramatic. Hence my suggestion for the block, same as Jeanneau suggested.

But since we are talking about a lot of tension here, the 2:1 option as mentioned by captbillh is the way to go. It does mean extra halyard yes and more line in the cockpit.
For in the marina, one could hoist a separate single line, so the purchase block is nearly in the top of the mast. Keeps the whole halyard in better shape anyway.

[jdl01]

The 2:1 option is messy and gear excessive. If you want the final solution, go back to the discussion with Marty. Remove the exit block and pulley - tear it out. Replace it with an upward exiting plain exit fitting. Mount a four point padeye about 8" above the exit box. Attach a short shaft universal block of appropriate rating to the padeye and run your flying sail halyard through it - no additional purchase. This has served racing boats well for 50 years. I originally offered a quick and dirty solution, but it appears you want a more sophisticated solution.

[captbillh]

If one looks at the Youtube vids of the Code 0 being flown on the 409 and 509 as installed by Jeanneau, a 2:1 purchase is Not used.
So in discussion with the Quantum rep in Annapolis re a Code 0, I will have the dealer install a payee for future use since the mast has not being installed yet but will try for now the single spinnaker halyard that comes with the "spinnaker" package.

The rep recommends the Selden GX rather than the CX even with the straight luff embedded in the sail. Does anyone have any thoughts on that subject? I do remember with my first furler on a 22' O'Day 1975 with steel luff cable that with higher winds the top never completely rolled up thus it had to come down before going in.

[jdl01]

selden appears to offer the best of both worlds. They offer a cx upper and lower bearing unit with a gx add on for the lower unit to fly loose luff sails. You do have to also include a separate none-twist luff line for the gennacker to roll on. When we bought our boat in 2012, only the cx option was available, so I am talking to our selden rep about buying only the gx conversion pieces - the issue is the ease of switching between the two bits of hardware at the tack as apparently, the same head unit will work for both. If the tack switch over is as easy as implied, this may be a winner.

[captbillh]

My 409 came with a US Spar that has a fairlead/eyelet installed about a foot under the top sheave. The rigger led the halyard down thru it.