Anchor tests from various sources : combined

snowleopard

Active member
Joined
16 May 2001
Messages
33,645
Location
Oxford
Visit site
the one thing it really shows is how variable the results of tests are. if you were to read the first table you'd go for a CQR or spade but reading on, the spade produces some pretty dismal results in subsequent tests.

i found the results for the fortress surprising - it often doesn't set but my experience in soft mud is that it it burrows like no other but they don't bear that out. i wonder if they used the soft mud angle setting.

we often see references to tables like this on the forum, generally referred to as 'scientific fact'. in reality no scientist would take any notice of such data without explanation of the number of observations and the conditions under which they were obtained)
 

Robin

Well-known member
Joined
30 May 2001
Messages
18,069
Location
high and dry on north island
Visit site
Thanks John

I had read most of these articles separately over the years but it is useful now to have them collated & downloaded into one place for reference.

Like anchors should be, I'm a 'stick in the mud' and continue to favour old favourites! We have Delta, CQR, and Fortress on board currently. The CQR has always been excellent and the Delta we have now used for 3 years seems even better, the Fortress is a kedge only and admirable for that job.

Robin
 

webcraft

Well-known member
Joined
8 Jul 2001
Messages
40,176
Location
Cyberspace
www.bluemoment.com
Peoples' loyalty to the CQR always amazes me - it never gets particularly good results in tests, either for holding or resetting, is awkward to stow and handle and catches fingers in the hinge - yet people love it. Why?

My theory is that it is just the name - one of the cleverest pieces of nautical marketing ever.

- Nick
 
Top