Anchors, once again.

Re: Oh Dear .... choose words carefully ...

I'm not sure that your interpretation of your photograph is correct. I have seen anchor rodes that curve between boat and anchor many times, both in drying locations like the one you show and in the Med afloat, where the water is sufficiently clear to see whatever is down there. So common is a curved rode that I am hard pressed to remember when I have seen a straight one, even in some quite considerable blows. The effect of frictional drag on the chain appears to be quite considerable.

However, I have direct evidence that the anchor is doing the work, even in light winds. In San Antonio, Ibiza last year we were anchored in no more than a F2-3, no waves. At the time we were in very shallow water, only about 2-3 metres, but with about 20 metres of chain out. We heard a bang from forward and immediately the boat began to drift backwards at some speed. On recovering the all-chain rode we found that the swivel had failed in a brittle fracture mode. YM printed my letter on the subject earlier in the year, leading to a later article in which I carried out destructive testing on a number of shackles and swivels.

I tend to agree with other above: the holding power of most decent anchors is so great that conditions would be appalling before they began to drag. We have seen more than 50 knots of wind this year when anchored in Sardinia. Our Delta did not drag, but then neither did a wide variety of other types on boats around us. However, I must say that after 3 nights of this we put the Fortress down as well, at about 45 degrees to the Delta, which quietened things down no end and gave considerably more restful sleep.
 
Re: Oh Dear .... choose words carefully ...

SBC - I am afraid your photo does nothing to inspire confidence in a CQR. By your own admission it has not set.

What you should be asking is whether one of the modern anchors would do a better job, and be at least as good in other conditions. If experimenting with anchors never took place we would still be using a rock on the end of a length of grass.

Scientific testing - not sure what your arguments are - what sort of testing would you like to see to be conclusive? If every time you drop the hook it is different then measured tests is always going to be a guide rather than the be and end all.

Craig - you are damned if you do and damned if you don't (supply info and answer questions)! I would like to see Rocnas on sale in the UK and try one myself before making up my mind, but I am open minded, unlike some. I would like your thoughts on how to stow on a foredeck though!

Sorry to poster - still a bit off piste still!
 
What I was illustrating was ....

My boat sat at her anchor without fuss. On hard bed that is difficult for any anchor to bed into.
The rode as Vyv quite rightly says - curved round ...

Vyv also I agre with that most anchors will work in most conditions ... What I add is that given sufficient size and weight - even a poor anchor in some table / cahrt will perform. It is only when you get extremes - that no-one in their right mind would want to be out in that many anchors will fail.

I am a great believer that despite fear etc. - if weather is that bad - get anchor up and ride out underway .... why test boat fittings and risk structural damage.

My photo shows my boat after significant wave action / weather at anchoring ... weather has abated while she settled and tide turned. Rode has curved round and anchor is still where I plonked it and despite what Mr. Rocna says - had a good burst of astern engine given ... (for the record - I have a 42HP Perkins in that 25ft MS ..... and I can drag an anchor out without too much effort with that ...I can also set an anchor easily ... IF bed is suitable .....).

The boat has stayed put. QED.

I am afraid that "Newbies" may now be swayed by biased sales pitch and stray away from practical demonstrations ...
 
Re: What I was illustrating was ....

SBC, I ddon't quite agree that only in extreme conditions an anchor will fail. I recall that I anchored bow-to with my Fortress kedge-anchor in Lipari, N of Sicily. In the evening normally a not very strong on-shore wind occured which caused the anchor to drag, although I had tested it with the engine. Re-anchoring did not help. This happened both times I was there. On the other hand, I anchored a number of times in the same way in Trappani, on the W-coast of Sicily and could barely get the Fortress out of the mud. Also in Ustica, an island N. of Palermo in Sicily, the anchor held extremely well, when a strong on-shore wind arose which blew side-wise upon the ship. We did not trust the development of the weather and decided to leave, but had problems getting the anchor out. My conclusion: An anchor is just as good as the bottom will allow it.
 
Re: What I was illustrating was ....

[ QUOTE ]
My conclusion: An anchor is just as good as the bottom will allow it.

[/ QUOTE ]I agree 100% There are no 'bad anchors' on the market, just better choices for a particular bottom. Which is why I was astonished that people could let that illustration which, we now learn, is only showing anchors in sand (sic) and, incredibly, tested by tugging with a Mobo!. It is hard to imagine a test less representative of a normal environment. I now use two anchors at the same time, on the same rode, of very different types (Bruce and Danforth) and this really does seem to work.
 
Blimey ..... who\'s talking absolutes ????

I don't disagree .....

All in all ... my posts allied with all the others - bar a few adverts of course - point in one direction ................... Not one anchor is answer - they all have merits, the bottom is important factor along with prevailing conditions.

All I was doing was showing that my plough anchor even in poor conditions held along with the chain I used............
 
Anchors

In which case you will agree that the comparison chart shown earlier in this thread and elsewhere in a recent thread is hogwash?
 
Re: Anchors

So how do you then go about analysing and comparing anchors?

Either you have to compare in the way the magazines do it at the moment or you rely soley on word and mouth of people who have tried them in similar bottom conditions to which you will be using.

How do you suggest it is done?
 
Already said that .... ages back ...

If anyone would like to scroll back - they will see that I questioned the basis of the tables and also mentioned that they get dragged out againa and again ....

Originally I posted my picture ages ago on another thread to show that the plough anchor - which in that and this thread has taken some stick about not being good - was in fact working ok for me ... I have to admit that the other thread also was pushing the rope rode idea as well ...

So yes agreed ... again.

Onto setting ... most anchors even with bars, stocks, rings, all-sorts all have a problem - if they break out and "roll" they take serious time to set again if they do. This makes or breaks any anchor and is one of the many reasons that different sea-beds affect anchors in different ways. Another factor is rode used ... often - as in the Dive Web-Page I gave link to in another post - mentions standard rode ......... ?? what is that ?? To one person it is 5m or 10m cahin and then rope, to me it is all chain, to another it's not even any chain ... what chance has comparison then.
Different boats have different effects on anchors and rodes ... a deep keeled sail-boat can at times ride better to an anchor than a high freeboard light smaller MOBO ... the MOBO snatching at the rode quite violently. Shock loads are often what break out anchors ... not steady pull.

The whole anchoring question is flawed whichever way you look at it ... There is no universal answer. Lemains using two anchors in tandem is a good one ... and ensures his peace of mind. There is nothing like overkill on anchoring. But there is being "economic" which leads to problems.
 
Re: Blimey ..... who\'s talking absolutes ????

Not one anchor is answer - they all have merits, the bottom is important factor along with prevailing conditions.

I couldn't agree more /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif (which I think means I might be agreeing with Lemain also /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif).

Mr Rocna's gripe is that he is in NZ and Manson (who, of course are a NZ anchor builder with an established international presence) has produced an anchor, the Supreme, that looks similar to his (eg with the curved bar over the top). He thinks he needs to show one way or the other (mainly by irrelevant claims) that that anchor is much inferior to his own - a marketing ploy that only works amongst the very gullible and, I think, puts others off (for those reasons I would only consider a Delta or Supreme in that style of anchor).

Again, I have no connection whatsoever with Manson.

John
 
Anchors

Re anchor testing, there have been some pretty technical threads on the subject here in the last year or so. If you search posts from a chap called Hylas you should find them. Hylas has written a book on anchors and has looked at the theoretical and practical issues.

As for trying out an anchor before buying, that is a very expensive and inconclusive experiment. The costs of buying, attaching, making a stowing system, and carrying out extensive tests on a variety of bottoms in different conditions is not for the faint-hearted! The best you can hope to do is listen to others keeping in mind your likely usage and make the best decision you can. It's not easy and anchors are very expensive pieces of kit.
 
Re: Anchors

That's a fair comment, but Hylas's own anchors are claimed to be superior to the CQR as well.

If his judgement alone is respected then why is there so much resistance to new design anchors, and mainly be people who have not tried them?

I'll have a look at his threads ..... tomorrow.
 
Re: Anchors

I can't speak for others but I am perfectly open to new designs. Hylas does try to present a scientific case for all the work he does. Sometimes it seems a bit OTT but then again, he is only reproducing the equations; he is not saying that all the variables are necessarily material. I can't afford to change anchors unless the case is overwhelming though I spend six months of the year at anchor so would change give a good enough case.
 
Re: Anchors

Probably because people are information gathering and want to know if these new design anchors work or not.

If people hear from enough people that have used them to have confidence in them, more people will use them, and there will be more reliable feedback.

Anchors are a fairly crucial piece of kit, so people don't want to spend relatively large amounts of money, putting even larger amounts of money at risk with unknown designs, or trying out the latest design every few months for everyone else's enlightenment?
 
Re: Anchors

It would seem that all the research into anchor types, both by commercial providers and by yachties themselves, is aimed at seeking a method of avoiding the obvious - that the only truly certain way to be bomb-proof at anchor is to have a big anchor and heavy chain. Steve Dashew of Beowulf fame has said "when they start laughing at the huge size of your anchor you know you are getting close to the ideal". He now carries a 110 kg Rocna on 370 ft of ⅝ ACCO Series 7 chain on his 82 ft mobo Wind Horse. This anchor is probably double what corresponding yachties would carry. One correspondent has suggested that it is not realistic to publish results for just sandy bottoms - why not? It's what most of us anchor in most of the time, and it is more representative than mud or shingle . Another correspondent has suggested that to be really secure on rocky bottoms a 45 lb CQR is not good enough and should be replaced by a 90 lb Fisherman - why not a 90 lb CQR? Why not just acknowledge it guys, - size matters!
 
Re: Anchors

This perennial dispute/debate/troll/conundrum.....

A deeply-experienced skipper, and owner of several chandlery stores, told me in the 70s - "The new owners of family cruisers will come up to me in the shop and ask if e.g. a cheap 20lb Danforth copy will be OK on their 32-foot boat. They want me to say 'Yes', and will hunt around until someone says so.

A few years later, the same folk will come up to me and ask 'What's the biggest anchor I could fit on the bows of my boat?'

What's made the difference? A few years' experience......"

There's nothing new about anchoring issues - peeps will *always* try to get away with inadequate gear and inadequate technique.

It's a pity the RYA syllabus doesn't include more about how to anchor effectively, along with other seamanship stuff, such as how to do *bad weather pilotage* instead of the 'weebly' useless stuff currently included. But then, some Uberfuhrer Dinghy Instructor will pontificate that 'Nobody anchors these days. Our research shows that marinas are all that anyone could want, and that marina skills - such as securing a 40-foot, 20-ton boat to a 12-foot, 2-ton finger, and securing a 100m. shore power cable to the national grid for the night - are far more important to today's digital sailor. And there's far more income in visitors' berths than anchor berths. That's what our income-partners MDL and Crest Nicholson want.......'




/forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif
 
HYLAS is back again

sbc Of course there is another Forumite who likes to refer to charts / tests as well - Hylas ..... who seems strangely absent from all this .....

Hi Everybody…

Sorry for not participating to this thread before.. Unlike most of you, I don’t have a full time Internet connection and on this side of the Big Blue, ADSL is quite rare.. but on the other hand, I’m enjoying beautiful travels..

So I’m back again…



Now, a SCOOP.. I will be very pleased to freely participate to anchors threads, as I don’t have now ANY FINANCIAL, COMMERCIAL OR MARKETING INTEREST WITH ANY ANCHOR MANUFACTURER..

Ships_Cat A golden rule in anchor selection is "Beware of anchor builders who claim that their anchor is the best".

Now, I’m fully free to give my own comments on this subject!..


mcw739 :Genuine Bruce anchor every time
Talbot : Bruce is the easiest to fit on a bow on most monos, but as a anchor, it is consistently outperformed by most others.

BRUCE anchors : Although, I know very experienced Blue Water Sailors, who are fully satisfied with their Bruce anchors, like Talbot I believe they are consistently outperformed by all “new generation” anchors..



mortehoe I'd REALLY like to know why a Rocna Anchor is a better bet on any particular bottom than any other ie Fisherman, Bruce, CQR, Danforth or just a plain long laid chain where the catanary doesn't even get to the last link!

Fisherman anchors have been developed by ancient Greek and Roman sailors, and in this matter too, technology has made some improvement.. Fortunately they are very few people who still believe in these old relics..

CQR, Danforth, have been developed more than 70 years ago, and they too are outperformed by “new generation” anchors..

“a plain long laid chain where the catenary doesn't even get to the last link!”

This is also an “old belief”.. perfectly true when the wind is lower than 20/30 knots, (but then who cares about the anchor holding?) but not longer true with winds over 30 knots (see http://alain.fraysse.free.fr/sail/rode/rode_b.htm)


sbc walk around any boatyard / marina and see what anchors are on boats .... despite the number of anchor types available - isn't it amazing that many are rarely seen ? That possibly 2 or 3 predominate ?????

Hi sbc, This is the “Panurge (follow the leader) sheep" law. [ If the lead sheep jumps down the cliff, all others will follow]. However, just because someone has chosen a particular piece of equipment doesn’t make those the right choices for you. It is interesting to observe what others are doing, but even more interesting to understand why, before following suit.

Then you got the right answer from Pye End:

Pye_End Problem is that walk into any chandler and chances are they will sell a CQR or Bruce or Danforth or Fishermans, but very little else, and these might be copies.

Also, if we all did the 'I'll buy what my neighbour uses' then nobody will ever try anything new even if does appear to be worth trying.

SlowlyButSurely Well you can't blame the anchor manufacturers for wanting to promote their own product but I think the black art of anchoring is more down to technique than anything else.

As I can now freely speak, I would make a difference between “anchor manufacturers” and “ anchors designers” . Everybody can become an anchor manufacturer.. They are plenty of Chinese people who hardly have seen a boat and who are manufacturing anchors (Claw – plough – etc..)… But to design a successful anchor, you should at least have some knowledge of the “anchoring art’.. (but it's easier to COPY existing anchors ;-) /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif)

wagenaar Spade relates the position of the shank on the flukes to that of the Ocean. This would imply that also the Sword could keep on dragging and not set properly. It would be interesting to hear a comment from Hylas on this subject.

Hi Wagenaar, When I was still working for Spade, I’ve developed the Oceane for those people who are more concerned by the price of their anchor (but still want a good product..) About the Oceane, we have had some negative comments concerning the facility to store it on the bow roller.. and that’s why, I have developed a new shank with a different shape than the Oceane. When testing it, we have found that the holding was about twice the one of the Oceane ( to mortehoe, because the anchor is digging in more deeply) and this why we have replaced the Oceane by the Sword..

CraigSmith_RocnaAnchors - In any case, a shipment of Rocnas is on its way to a distributor in the Netherlands next week, for resale in Europe. So, hopefully we can change this state of affairs.

VERY INTERESTING NEW!.. as, if the Spade anchor is not patented in New Zealand, it is fully patented in the Netherlands (and in UK too!) I strongly believe the new owner of Spade company would be quite interested to know who will be the Rocna’s Dutch distributor.. :0)

I apologize for this rather long post, but I’ve been away for several months now, and I promise to not come again too often.. ;0)
 
[ QUOTE ]
I have not used the new Manson anchor and its release is quite recent so have not had any feedback either.

However, Manson are a very well respected and trustworty anchor builder here, building quality products (supply a lot to superyachts as well as for commercial and pleasure vessels). The value of their claims is also not clouded by an involved individual's self serving claims as those of some other similar anchors are.

If considering such a style of anchor it is the one I would go for myself.

(PS I have no connection with them, but have used their other anchors).

John

[/ QUOTE ]

I am curious at this statement. While Manson are not popular up here, I take it they are down under. But they do not seem to sell original designs, and there are any number of knock-off companies building CQR, North Sea, and Danforth copies. Davis and Kingston for example. Manson have outdone the others by adding a Rocna to their range, no doubt owing something to geographical proximity.

Is it not reasonable to assume the first design will be a bit better thought out than some cheapskate copy?

I am thinking I would rather have Nikes than the cheap look-alikes.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I assumed the original poster was, and certainly was myself, referring to Manson's new Supreme anchor.

Going by your own pdf that you linked which makes comparisons of CQR and Rocna (which I understand is your own product) with Manson's much older plough anchor that has been around for many years I am not sure which of Manson's anchors you are in fact commenting on. Or are you just inferring that because your own .pdf claims that the Manson plough is inferior to your own anchor and the CQR then their Supreme anchor will be too?

[/ QUOTE ]
I think that is a disingenious comment. Craig Smith is, to my mind at least, doing two things: 1- saying the CQR copy isn't as good as the CQR itself, and using that as an argument against copies per se, and 2- hinting that the Supreme is in fact a copy of his Rocna, without saying it directly. If this is the case, I applaud his restraint - in his shoes I am sure I would be spitting kittens if someone copied my design.

[ QUOTE ]
I also see that the Sail etc tests show the CQR as failing to set while dragging while your own provided .pdf shows it to reset - perhaps an indication of the value of such anchor comparisons in the real world outside of their use for self fulfilling promotion by some.

All seems pretty cloudy to me /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif.

In the end, the West Marine and Sail tests you give seem to show the Manson Supreme up in very good light, thanks as I had not seen those.

John

[/ QUOTE ]

John I must say I am beginning to question your motives in this thread, although much of what I have read of your other posts are quite lucid and worthwhile. You seem to have a bit of a grudge against Rocna (the product / or just Craig?)

The Sail testing was obviously done in different conditions to the PDF from Craig. It would be plain silly to state the CQR never sets, it quite clearly does otherwise it would never be used by anyone. It just didn't in the (obviously more difficult) conditions that Sail subjected their test anchors to.

Lastly you comment regarding the Supreme is just silly, with respect - study the chart properly - it is halfway down with a "max before release" figure of something like half that of the Rocna. If I understand it correctly, the other figure in grey, the "max pull", is largely unimportant since this is that figure recorded while the anchors were dragging, and who cares once it's dragging - too late yes?

Correct me if I am wrong.
 
[ QUOTE ]
without sounding boastful, there is little competition

A golden rule in anchor selection is "Beware of anchor builders who claim that their anchor is the best".

John

[/ QUOTE ]
Hmmn. Again hello John. I am only posting this because I now feel Craig is being unfairly bullied. He did not claim his anchor was best, he posted a chart of an independent test which effectively said it was. I have no problem with that.

I propose another golden rule in anchor selection is "Beware of forum addicts who spend more time in front of a keyboard than sailing (or anchoring)". The number of posts under your username, when compared to your YBW registration date, is fascinating.

No doubt I will now appear as a troll and will attract some flames from the regulars... Apologies in advance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

zoidberg
The definitive anchors article?
2
Replies
20
Views
760
Wansworth
W
Dino
Anchor upgrade
2
Replies
21
Views
822
Tranona
T

Share this page

Top