Why iron where a bit or rope suffices?
My new genoa was configured exactly the same as Andrew’s photo prior to removing the wire and shackle in order to replace it with the aeroluff spar and I agree is counter-intuative and raises the foot higher than need be. Now the reefing spar is installed the luff tension is barely affected by the halyard, instead it is set by adjusting 3mm cord at head and tack to the new thimbles on the spar and the foot is held considerably closer to the foredeck, in my case it ended up being almost 6cm closer and really gets the tack up close to the furling drum. A vast improvement.
Please don’t mention the safety factor of a double stay
okay I wont, simply because it cannot be reliably calculated. However, ocean going yachts dont step their masts all that often whereas trailing and touring wayfarers regularly do, even sometimes afloat in order to shoot bridges and this is the key advantage to leaving it there so for me this isnt primarily a ‘belt and braces’ issue. I’m delighted to say that the snagging issue is for all practical purposes non existant now the spar installed; we’ve found that we only needed to tension the forestay once when the mast was initially stepped, thereafter it has stayed perfectly tight because the need for various luff tensions have been almost completed eliminated because the spar maintains a straight leading edge regardless of wind loading. The sail furls much tighter and more evenly than it ever did without the spar which I think helps too. Admittedly we dont feel the need to re-tension the rig to suit conditions as we are cruisers not racers so have opted for average rig-tension settings but since racers have to keep the forestay they dont get much choice in the matter and most dont seem to mind fine tuning for prevailing conditions