bilbobaggins
N/A
How would you have done better? Or did the skipper do about as much as one reasonably could....?
MAIB Case 22
/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
MAIB Case 22
/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
Anchoring techniques
- Thread starter bilbobaggins
- Start date
fluffc
Well-Known Member
For this part of the country, you can never have too much chain. His chain was inadequate in length so he had to rely on 'modifications' to try and make the situation better. 20m of chain is an apalling length.
36m scope is also no where near enough for bad conditions. Fine in marginal, but if the weather's getting up one would need more.
2.7m Charted Depth + 4m tide (estimated) = 6.7m. 36m of chain works out at less than a 1:6 scope. Bearing in mind that 5-7 is recommended normally I think he was asking for it.
36m scope is also no where near enough for bad conditions. Fine in marginal, but if the weather's getting up one would need more.
2.7m Charted Depth + 4m tide (estimated) = 6.7m. 36m of chain works out at less than a 1:6 scope. Bearing in mind that 5-7 is recommended normally I think he was asking for it.
Mirelle
N/A
Pathetic....
A 34-35ft steel boat, displacement, shall we guess, 9 tons, hanging off a 35lbs anchor and 10 fathoms of chain, with various bits of jewellery hung off it, such as a 7.5kg Bruce anchor and a 5kg weight (5kg!) in the hope that its all going to work...
This was on a "training course"??
The wind is F6, the glass is falling - so off they all go to their pits with no anchor watch...
They find themselves aground so instead of sorting themselves out (could they?) they hit the squawk box and call the lifeboat...
Now we get to the really good bit...
"the crew managed to recover the anchors during this time so they could be used again when necessary..."
Totally unseamanlike from start to finish.
The "skipper" should have whatever bit of paper allows him to "train" (hah!) other idiots rescinded, and be put to work doing something within his competence.
A little gentle filing for his or her local council might suit.
Oh, how would I have done better?
A 34-35ft steel boat, displacement, shall we guess, 9 tons, hanging off a 35lbs anchor and 10 fathoms of chain, with various bits of jewellery hung off it, such as a 7.5kg Bruce anchor and a 5kg weight (5kg!) in the hope that its all going to work...
This was on a "training course"??
The wind is F6, the glass is falling - so off they all go to their pits with no anchor watch...
They find themselves aground so instead of sorting themselves out (could they?) they hit the squawk box and call the lifeboat...
Now we get to the really good bit...
"the crew managed to recover the anchors during this time so they could be used again when necessary..."
Totally unseamanlike from start to finish.
The "skipper" should have whatever bit of paper allows him to "train" (hah!) other idiots rescinded, and be put to work doing something within his competence.
A little gentle filing for his or her local council might suit.
Oh, how would I have done better?
vyv_cox
Well-Known Member
I've said on these forums a number of times: tandem anchoring cannot be relied upon. If the 7.5 kg anchor has any significant holding power it will prevent the 15 kg anchor from bedding properly. The pull simply rotates the bigger anchor such that its tip will not bed. Once the lighter anchor begins to drag, which it almost inevitably will in a good blow with a reasonable size boat attached to it, then the larger anchor is simply dead weight, not very helpful.
A 15 kg anchor is perfectly capable of holding this boat in a force 6, provided it is given the chance to bed in properly and there is sufficient warp out. My 15 kg Delta and 8 mm chain has held us in 50 knots of wind on several occasions. If desired, a second anchor laid at about 60 degrees from the bower can help in preventing yawing, both giving a more restful ride and reducing snatching.
A 15 kg anchor is perfectly capable of holding this boat in a force 6, provided it is given the chance to bed in properly and there is sufficient warp out. My 15 kg Delta and 8 mm chain has held us in 50 knots of wind on several occasions. If desired, a second anchor laid at about 60 degrees from the bower can help in preventing yawing, both giving a more restful ride and reducing snatching.
Norman_E
Well-Known Member
I agree with you, and also wonder if the two anchors used were not a bit on the small side, bearing in mind that this was a steel yacht and therefore probably on the heavy side for its 10.7 metre length.
vyv_cox
Well-Known Member
Re: Pathetic....
Andrew,
Great to read your own reminiscences of that voyage. I have read the all Tilman books and love them dearly. Your voyage and particularly the recovery from grounding was always one of the highlights for me.
Vyv
Andrew,
Great to read your own reminiscences of that voyage. I have read the all Tilman books and love them dearly. Your voyage and particularly the recovery from grounding was always one of the highlights for me.
Vyv
Robin
Well-Known Member
Apart from the confusing diagram which shows the anchors deployed in reverse to the written description?
Tandem anchoring in my view is a no no, all very decorative and no added grip and what a mess to pull up in a hurry to leave. IMO the lead anchor would prevent the main one from being properly dug in.
Did they DIG it in or just give a light pull under engine, the narrative to me suggests the latter.
He was anchoring on warp with a short chain length, so effectively an all warp rode thus 5 x depth would be a minimum for a crowded anchorage - in calm conditions. In this case a lot more scope is called for as strong winds were expected.
If he was concerned enough to mess around with adding the 2nd anchor and an 'Angel' AND he had 4 crew on board who were on a training course then why no anchor watch?
Politically or HSE correct it might be but taking time out for donning lifejackets (did they have a kit inspection too?) wasted valuable time before someone could get the boat under power either moving clear or holding them in position. Time sometimes is of the essence.
Tandem anchoring in my view is a no no, all very decorative and no added grip and what a mess to pull up in a hurry to leave. IMO the lead anchor would prevent the main one from being properly dug in.
Did they DIG it in or just give a light pull under engine, the narrative to me suggests the latter.
He was anchoring on warp with a short chain length, so effectively an all warp rode thus 5 x depth would be a minimum for a crowded anchorage - in calm conditions. In this case a lot more scope is called for as strong winds were expected.
If he was concerned enough to mess around with adding the 2nd anchor and an 'Angel' AND he had 4 crew on board who were on a training course then why no anchor watch?
Politically or HSE correct it might be but taking time out for donning lifejackets (did they have a kit inspection too?) wasted valuable time before someone could get the boat under power either moving clear or holding them in position. Time sometimes is of the essence.
Poignard
Well-Known Member
Seems a bit lightweight for that boat. I have a 35lb CQR for a 28-footer and I'd use a bigger one if I could cope with it.
Also when tandem anchoring, shouldn't the outboard anchor be shackled to the ring of the inboard anchor and not to the point where you would normally attach a trip line because it will do just that! i.e. tend to trip the inboard anchor or at least prevent it digging in freely?
Also when tandem anchoring, shouldn't the outboard anchor be shackled to the ring of the inboard anchor and not to the point where you would normally attach a trip line because it will do just that! i.e. tend to trip the inboard anchor or at least prevent it digging in freely?
duncan
Well-Known Member
well you agree with him and I'll agree with vyv..........
the jewelery is ridiculous - if you are going to use it constructively here then setting the 7.5 at 60 degree in favour of the predicited shift, and the angel close to it's stock, makes the best use of the available resources given the forecast......
arguing that there wasn't enough chain at 30m is a laugh given that they only had 36m out at all ffs. The 30m cahin was fine - could have done with a bit more rope though - why they didn't have 45/50 or more out beats me. This is particularily shallow water for a potentially big sea so I would look to 10:1 for safety.
Moving on - setting an anchor alarm is good - setting one to tell you when you are already in the [--word removed--] isn't.
Finally it doesn't really look like the right anchorage for the conditions forecast does it? Difficult to pursue this without a better understanding of the options but I fail to see how they were in the right place if a failed anchor resulted int hem being blown onto the nearest hazard.
the jewelery is ridiculous - if you are going to use it constructively here then setting the 7.5 at 60 degree in favour of the predicited shift, and the angel close to it's stock, makes the best use of the available resources given the forecast......
arguing that there wasn't enough chain at 30m is a laugh given that they only had 36m out at all ffs. The 30m cahin was fine - could have done with a bit more rope though - why they didn't have 45/50 or more out beats me. This is particularily shallow water for a potentially big sea so I would look to 10:1 for safety.
Moving on - setting an anchor alarm is good - setting one to tell you when you are already in the [--word removed--] isn't.
Finally it doesn't really look like the right anchorage for the conditions forecast does it? Difficult to pursue this without a better understanding of the options but I fail to see how they were in the right place if a failed anchor resulted int hem being blown onto the nearest hazard.
Krusty
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
---- said on these forums a number of times: tandem anchoring cannot be relied upon.
[/ QUOTE ]
In total agreement : it is a relic of the days when the fisherman type was the norm, but I came across it again in a relatively recent book by a French 'expert' on anchoring.
As a result, and faced with staying in a Hebridean anchorage with ''F10, perhaps F11'' forecast for the area, I shackled my twin CQRs in tandem for the first (and last) time. At the height of the storm we were suddenly on our way to open water, with a lee behind Cape Wrath as our most likely salvation. Thanks to an anchor watch and a quick-starting engine, we got the ironmongery up before being driven into the big stuff roaring past the point half a cable away. We removed the second anchor and relaid the first, which then held hard in its usual exemplary fashion.
A few moments thought, and all became clear: an anchor designed to bury deep is inhibited by shackling anything to it: Tandem ? NEVER AGAIN!
---- said on these forums a number of times: tandem anchoring cannot be relied upon.
[/ QUOTE ]
In total agreement : it is a relic of the days when the fisherman type was the norm, but I came across it again in a relatively recent book by a French 'expert' on anchoring.
As a result, and faced with staying in a Hebridean anchorage with ''F10, perhaps F11'' forecast for the area, I shackled my twin CQRs in tandem for the first (and last) time. At the height of the storm we were suddenly on our way to open water, with a lee behind Cape Wrath as our most likely salvation. Thanks to an anchor watch and a quick-starting engine, we got the ironmongery up before being driven into the big stuff roaring past the point half a cable away. We removed the second anchor and relaid the first, which then held hard in its usual exemplary fashion.
A few moments thought, and all became clear: an anchor designed to bury deep is inhibited by shackling anything to it: Tandem ? NEVER AGAIN!
graham
Well-Known Member
The GPS alarm set to 0.03nm they grounded at o.04 nms from their anchorage position.not much margin for error then.
Normally I am reluctant to second judge other skippers after a cock up but I can't be the only one who couldn't sleep soundly so close to a LEE shore (after the predicted shift)in winds gusting force 9.
Even with an anchor watch they would have had to react quickly to prevent her going aground once she started dragging. At least his students will have learned from the experience,if they had got away with it they could have carried on thinking that was normal practice.
As to what I would have done. Firstly been highly reluctant to anchor so close to grounding.
If there was no real alternative other than putting out to sea all night which I would have considered ,then i would have had an anchor watch.taking the first watch myself,then slept with some clothes on ready for a quick get away.Probably i would have nipped out "for a pee" a few times to keep an eye on things.
Normally I am reluctant to second judge other skippers after a cock up but I can't be the only one who couldn't sleep soundly so close to a LEE shore (after the predicted shift)in winds gusting force 9.
Even with an anchor watch they would have had to react quickly to prevent her going aground once she started dragging. At least his students will have learned from the experience,if they had got away with it they could have carried on thinking that was normal practice.
As to what I would have done. Firstly been highly reluctant to anchor so close to grounding.
If there was no real alternative other than putting out to sea all night which I would have considered ,then i would have had an anchor watch.taking the first watch myself,then slept with some clothes on ready for a quick get away.Probably i would have nipped out "for a pee" a few times to keep an eye on things.
CodStewart
Well-Known Member
Grrrr. A lousy pdf made my computer drag.
graham
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
Grrrr. A lousy pdf made my computer drag.
[/ QUOTE ]
Annoying ,but better than having your anchor drag /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
Grrrr. A lousy pdf made my computer drag.
[/ QUOTE ]
Annoying ,but better than having your anchor drag /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
hylass
Well-Known Member
Tandem set technique
[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue">In total agreement : it is a relic of the days when the fisherman type was the norm, but I came across it again in a relatively recent book by a French 'expert' on anchoring. </span>
[/ QUOTE ]
A French "expert" on anchoring?? Would it be possible to have a "French" expert?? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
As I did write several times, I'm absolutely opposed to this "Russian Roulette" technique:
Attaching two anchors to one rode, known as tandem anchoring, should be avoided.
The double approach attaches a second anchor with around 15’ of chain in front of the first anchor. I personally almost lost my boat trying out this idea. At the time, my first anchor dragged. Needless to say, it was an old generation model, so I decided to try something new. I added a smaller anchor in front of the large one. This worsened the holding power as opposed to doubling it, drifting swiftly on the smaller anchor while the larger one couldn’t grip at all.
On an imaginary level, it might seem like two anchors should hold better than one. This is however only true when both anchors can set perfectly. Whatever anchoring technique you use, there’s never a guarantee that both anchors are going to set well. On the contrary, once the first anchor is set in the seafloor, it will hinder the other anchor from setting also.
When an anchor has dragged, a trench formed behind it and this quickly backfilled with loose un-compacted sand. These areas can be still visible after several tides and may explain why some popular anchorages are criss-crossed with patches of poor holding.
Then, if the most proximal anchor set, they are very good chances (?) that the distal anchor will fall down in this loose bottom, with, as a consequence, a poor holding!.
I have done a series of approximately 70 tandem anchorages in the clear waters of the Med, diving on nearly all of them.. in 62% of the cases, only one anchor was set.. During bad weather, you will not have the possibility to dive to check your anchors.. and you only have to “trust” your anchors.. Which is what I call “the Russian Roulette” anchoring..
For those who insist on using two anchors on one rode, I offer the following suggestions:
• Only use two identical anchors, with the same size and model.
• The size of each anchor should be able to withstand the load of your boat on its own, without the second one.
• The two anchors should be separated by a piece of chain of around 3 to 5 meters in length.
• Never attach the chain from the second anchor directly to the first anchor; instead, attach it to the connector of the first anchor.
• Finally, remember that new generation anchors have holding power far superior to older models, and they do not suddenly disengage from the seafloor like plate or CQR anchors. Instead, they slowly drift, remaining embedded. I am convinced that a single new generation anchor with high holding power is safer and more reliable than linking two old generation anchors tandem set.
Here is a letter from Jean Louis
GOLDSCHMID (Nautical Center of Glénans) published in N° 114 of Glénans news letter (August 83) (“badly” translated from French)
<< The Tandem set technique it is a very good technique with Fisherman anchors and I personally made some experiment at time when the Glénans’s boats only had this type of anchors on board.
On the other hand,. I began one day to have doubts while seeing tandem set anchored boats dragging.
I thus carried out a series of measurements of traction with a motor boat. Almost all the tests gave the same results: one needed 200 rpm less to drag 2 tandem set anchors (CQR or Fluke anchors) than only one of these anchors alone. I thus checked what occurred, with small anchor on the dry maërl beach of “PEN MARYSE” in the Archipelago of Glénans, pulling by hand.
First problem with the CQR:, it doesn’t have any fixation hole to attach the second anchor (that should have been a sufficient reason for not using this technique), I thus tested the bar, the trip line hole, the elbow of the shank. On these 3 points. the effect is the same one: the articulation plays badly, the plow cannot dig in. Remain the extremity of the shank, but it is not better. Almost each time, the chain comes to obstruct the plow The whole system does hold only on the most distant anchor. If this one is smaller, it holds less than only the large anchor one. I noted too that an anchor holds very badly in the furrow of another.
With the “Fluke” anchors: this is again the same problem of devoted fixation, and it does not have there anything which can be used except sometimes the trip line rings which are usually not strong enough. However, from time to time y obtained results comparable with the holding of only one anchor.
I thus concluded from it, that I had sufficiently poisoned my life by re-installed useless scrap heap to definitively give up the tandem set technique.
[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue">In total agreement : it is a relic of the days when the fisherman type was the norm, but I came across it again in a relatively recent book by a French 'expert' on anchoring. </span>
[/ QUOTE ]
A French "expert" on anchoring?? Would it be possible to have a "French" expert?? /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
As I did write several times, I'm absolutely opposed to this "Russian Roulette" technique:
Attaching two anchors to one rode, known as tandem anchoring, should be avoided.
The double approach attaches a second anchor with around 15’ of chain in front of the first anchor. I personally almost lost my boat trying out this idea. At the time, my first anchor dragged. Needless to say, it was an old generation model, so I decided to try something new. I added a smaller anchor in front of the large one. This worsened the holding power as opposed to doubling it, drifting swiftly on the smaller anchor while the larger one couldn’t grip at all.
On an imaginary level, it might seem like two anchors should hold better than one. This is however only true when both anchors can set perfectly. Whatever anchoring technique you use, there’s never a guarantee that both anchors are going to set well. On the contrary, once the first anchor is set in the seafloor, it will hinder the other anchor from setting also.
When an anchor has dragged, a trench formed behind it and this quickly backfilled with loose un-compacted sand. These areas can be still visible after several tides and may explain why some popular anchorages are criss-crossed with patches of poor holding.
Then, if the most proximal anchor set, they are very good chances (?) that the distal anchor will fall down in this loose bottom, with, as a consequence, a poor holding!.
I have done a series of approximately 70 tandem anchorages in the clear waters of the Med, diving on nearly all of them.. in 62% of the cases, only one anchor was set.. During bad weather, you will not have the possibility to dive to check your anchors.. and you only have to “trust” your anchors.. Which is what I call “the Russian Roulette” anchoring..
For those who insist on using two anchors on one rode, I offer the following suggestions:
• Only use two identical anchors, with the same size and model.
• The size of each anchor should be able to withstand the load of your boat on its own, without the second one.
• The two anchors should be separated by a piece of chain of around 3 to 5 meters in length.
• Never attach the chain from the second anchor directly to the first anchor; instead, attach it to the connector of the first anchor.
• Finally, remember that new generation anchors have holding power far superior to older models, and they do not suddenly disengage from the seafloor like plate or CQR anchors. Instead, they slowly drift, remaining embedded. I am convinced that a single new generation anchor with high holding power is safer and more reliable than linking two old generation anchors tandem set.
Here is a letter from Jean Louis
GOLDSCHMID (Nautical Center of Glénans) published in N° 114 of Glénans news letter (August 83) (“badly” translated from French)
<< The Tandem set technique it is a very good technique with Fisherman anchors and I personally made some experiment at time when the Glénans’s boats only had this type of anchors on board.
On the other hand,. I began one day to have doubts while seeing tandem set anchored boats dragging.
I thus carried out a series of measurements of traction with a motor boat. Almost all the tests gave the same results: one needed 200 rpm less to drag 2 tandem set anchors (CQR or Fluke anchors) than only one of these anchors alone. I thus checked what occurred, with small anchor on the dry maërl beach of “PEN MARYSE” in the Archipelago of Glénans, pulling by hand.
First problem with the CQR:, it doesn’t have any fixation hole to attach the second anchor (that should have been a sufficient reason for not using this technique), I thus tested the bar, the trip line hole, the elbow of the shank. On these 3 points. the effect is the same one: the articulation plays badly, the plow cannot dig in. Remain the extremity of the shank, but it is not better. Almost each time, the chain comes to obstruct the plow The whole system does hold only on the most distant anchor. If this one is smaller, it holds less than only the large anchor one. I noted too that an anchor holds very badly in the furrow of another.
With the “Fluke” anchors: this is again the same problem of devoted fixation, and it does not have there anything which can be used except sometimes the trip line rings which are usually not strong enough. However, from time to time y obtained results comparable with the holding of only one anchor.
I thus concluded from it, that I had sufficiently poisoned my life by re-installed useless scrap heap to definitively give up the tandem set technique.
graham
Well-Known Member
Re: Tandem set technique
it certainly makes sense what you say about the second anchor in tandem dragging through the ground allready broken up and weakened by the first anchor.Its a point I hadn't considered before.
I think though that the crux of the problem in this case was they were anchored VERYclose upwind of shallow water in a gale with no anchor watch other than the GPS which didnt give them enough time to react.
it certainly makes sense what you say about the second anchor in tandem dragging through the ground allready broken up and weakened by the first anchor.Its a point I hadn't considered before.
I think though that the crux of the problem in this case was they were anchored VERYclose upwind of shallow water in a gale with no anchor watch other than the GPS which didnt give them enough time to react.
Poignard
Well-Known Member
Re: Tandem set technique
[ QUOTE ]
..anchored VERYclose upwind of shallow water in a gale with no anchor watch..
[/ QUOTE ]
Amazing how laid back some people are! I would have been having kittens in that situation.
[ QUOTE ]
..anchored VERYclose upwind of shallow water in a gale with no anchor watch..
[/ QUOTE ]
Amazing how laid back some people are! I would have been having kittens in that situation.
Krusty
Well-Known Member
Re: Tandem set technique
Hi! Hylas,
A very comprehensive confirmation of my empirical findings and conclusion!
The name of the French 'expert' whose book I read is, I think Alain Gree? I would NOT now recommend anyone to read it.
Hi! Hylas,
A very comprehensive confirmation of my empirical findings and conclusion!
The name of the French 'expert' whose book I read is, I think Alain Gree? I would NOT now recommend anyone to read it.
hylass
Well-Known Member
Re: Tandem set technique
[ QUOTE ]
The name of the French 'expert' whose book I read is, I think Alain Gree? I would NOT now recommend anyone to read it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well Alain GREE is famous writer for.. children histories.. but absolutely not an anchor expert.. he has written a book about anchors, which looks very nice but which has nothing in it and which is now completely obsolete..
[ QUOTE ]
The name of the French 'expert' whose book I read is, I think Alain Gree? I would NOT now recommend anyone to read it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well Alain GREE is famous writer for.. children histories.. but absolutely not an anchor expert.. he has written a book about anchors, which looks very nice but which has nothing in it and which is now completely obsolete..
craigsmith
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
How would you have done better? Or did the skipper do about as much as one reasonably could....?
MAIB Case 22
/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
The scenario:
- 10.7m yacht deploys a Delta 16Kg and Bruce 7.5Kg in tandem.
- 4m rode between the tandems
- From the primary anchor, 20m of chain and 16m nylon making total of 36m
- A 5Kg kellet was in place
Sizing: the Delta is probably adequately sized, although it depends to some extent on the displacement of the boat which is not given.
Rode scope: depth is not provided, so it can't be said what the scope was.
The above notwithstanding, the mistakes made relate to the tandem set-up and the kellet.
1) The kellet is pointless, especially of this size
2) Not enough rode was deployed between the two anchors (a boat length should be the minimum)
3) The rode between the anchors must be chain, I get the impression it was rope although it is not specified
4) Tandem anchors should always be of the same type - they were not
5) The trip-line of the Delta is NOT designed for a tandem anchor and is the WRONG place to attach its rode - this will have unbalanced the Delta, and is the mostly likely cause of the system failure, since the Bruce on its own is far too small to be effective.
The conclusion blames the use of a tandem set-up in veering wind conditions, but this is not necessarily the case. A rig done correctly using decent anchors will handle wind veers. The "lessons" should relate to a poor understanding of the theory of tandem anchoring and subsequent error.
How would you have done better? Or did the skipper do about as much as one reasonably could....?
MAIB Case 22
/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
The scenario:
- 10.7m yacht deploys a Delta 16Kg and Bruce 7.5Kg in tandem.
- 4m rode between the tandems
- From the primary anchor, 20m of chain and 16m nylon making total of 36m
- A 5Kg kellet was in place
Sizing: the Delta is probably adequately sized, although it depends to some extent on the displacement of the boat which is not given.
Rode scope: depth is not provided, so it can't be said what the scope was.
The above notwithstanding, the mistakes made relate to the tandem set-up and the kellet.
1) The kellet is pointless, especially of this size
2) Not enough rode was deployed between the two anchors (a boat length should be the minimum)
3) The rode between the anchors must be chain, I get the impression it was rope although it is not specified
4) Tandem anchors should always be of the same type - they were not
5) The trip-line of the Delta is NOT designed for a tandem anchor and is the WRONG place to attach its rode - this will have unbalanced the Delta, and is the mostly likely cause of the system failure, since the Bruce on its own is far too small to be effective.
The conclusion blames the use of a tandem set-up in veering wind conditions, but this is not necessarily the case. A rig done correctly using decent anchors will handle wind veers. The "lessons" should relate to a poor understanding of the theory of tandem anchoring and subsequent error.
craigsmith
Well-Known Member
Re: Tandem set technique
[ QUOTE ]
it certainly makes sense what you say about the second anchor in tandem dragging through the ground allready broken up and weakened by the first anchor.Its a point I hadn't considered before.
[/ QUOTE ]Absolutely not, that is a logical fallacy. If both anchors have dragged far enough that the tandem has entered the trough of the primary, you have problems in any case.
Furthermore entering another anchor's drag trough often allows the anchor to bury more deeply. It is not a bad thing per se. We have seen this frequently in testing.
[ QUOTE ]
it certainly makes sense what you say about the second anchor in tandem dragging through the ground allready broken up and weakened by the first anchor.Its a point I hadn't considered before.
[/ QUOTE ]Absolutely not, that is a logical fallacy. If both anchors have dragged far enough that the tandem has entered the trough of the primary, you have problems in any case.
Furthermore entering another anchor's drag trough often allows the anchor to bury more deeply. It is not a bad thing per se. We have seen this frequently in testing.
