But seriously though, folks, the fisherman's anchor

Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor . . .

[ QUOTE ]
. . . is there for the next time there isn't an empty mooring in Braye, or I want to stop by the Rosiere steps, or give the crew a hernia apiece trying to weigh in Havre Goslein (where those diamond markers are quite important after all.)

That was long before I bought Ebb Tide of course. She was kept in Guernsey and came with two anchors - both Fishermans. So that bent bit of metal hanging over the bows is just posin'.

And now I'm worrying about the bar code . . .

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you checked the "use by" date??? /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue">the two main types of anchors most commonly used, are the CQR types, and the Fisherman. That hasn't come about by accident, or fashion, it's come about by finding what is best, in this area, over many years of usage.</span>

[/ QUOTE ]

the Main type of restaurant that you can find everywhere around the world is.. Mc Donald!!! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

It doesn't mean that it is the best one.. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue">the two main types of anchors most commonly used, are the CQR types, and the Fisherman. That hasn't come about by accident, or fashion, it's come about by finding what is best, in this area, over many years of usage.</span>

[/ QUOTE ]

the Main type of restaurant that you can find everywhere around the world is.. Mc Donald!!! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

It doesn't mean that it is the best one.. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Mr. Alain P.

I would sooner put my trust, and my boats safety in the judgement of my fellow seafarers, who share my cruising grounds, and know what they are talking about, than in yet another new design, that to be fair has not enough history, to make the taking note of it worth the bother.

We sail in the Bristol Channel for our local waters, with very fast tides with a huge range, Is it your considered opinion that we don't know what we are talking about?

It may be that you have designed a useful anchor, but I aint about to spend me hard earned on one, until I think it will be an appropriate thing for me to be doing. Also, as they say, the proof in the pudding is in the eating of it, and I doubt that they will be serving 'em up in Mc,Donalds.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

Well Mr. Smiffy..

The design of the Fisherman anchor is only 2000 years old.. that is completely negligible compared to the history of the Killick. anchor. However it does not seem that you use the Killick. anchor.

ancrepierre2.jpg


Of my side, I think that an anchor which have more than 10 years of experiment in many seas of the world, presents a sufficient history.

Your opinion on the comparison between the Fisherman anchor and the other anchors is biased as long as you did not have the possibility of using and comparing it with modern anchors, what I had personally the occasion to make.

Your tides, as fast as they are, cause only one negligible effort on the hulls compared to the effort created by the wind. it is thus not an argument.

Now as you know what you are talking about?, I am ready to take up the gauntlet:

- your Fisherman against the modern anchor of my choice of identical weight, under the conditions which you choose, and the value of your boat is bet…

and that the best win!.. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

I think you are somewhat adrift of of the point chap. Around here we use what we use because we trust them, and we know they work wind, tide or whatever, we don't do it out of bloody mindedness.

As I already said, you may well have designed a useful anchor, but it will not be suitable for all situations, no anchor is. The history I was refering to, is the history and experience of using yours and others "modern anchors" around here.

Now I am sure that you are a very clever chap, and that you have researched your ideas very thoroughly, but your design, and the designs of others, are not, nor can never be suitable for all conditions (IMHO).

I think that most people will be aware that manufacturers / designers touting their wares, have a vested interest, and that aint any reason to purchase their products, whether or not they still own the company that makes them. Also, for a lot of people there are financial constraints, and the cost of some of these "modern high tech anchors" is prohibitive to them.

Regarding the Fisherman anchor, other people on this forum have already said that they use them and they have said why they use them. It seems to me that you are suggesting that we don't know what we are talking about? That, it seems to me is not a good way to get people, (potential customers) on side.

Now I have no wish to engage with you further on this subject, mostly because I find your attititude a touch obnoxious, certainly not the attitude of someone I would wish to give my hard earned to.

I wish you well, and happy sailing, Charlie.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

The Fisherman's anchor is arguably the first anchor designed from scratch, rather than a collection of sticks and rocks tied together. Metal working capabilities provided for this, with the ability to cheaply construct components as required, rather than simply taking a rock and fashioning wooden additions to help it hold.

A Roman design from about the 1st century BCE:
lead.jpg


The structural parts of this anchor are wood, but the stock is cast lead. The fluke tips, nails, and other necessarily metal components would be either lead or bronze.

This design is effectively a double sided hook. When the more advanced dynamics are not understood, and wise seamen would not expect their anchors to save their ships in storms in any case, this is as sophisticated as anchor design gets. It should be pointed out however that, while these designs "did the job", they were anything but perfect. Thousands of ships have been lost at sea that may have been saved had they been equipped with more effective anchors.

This concept is developed over time into something like the Fisherman's design with which we are familiar. The current Fisherman's concept with metal flukes is basically medieval - for instance, consider its appearance in the Bayeux Tapestry:

bayeux.jpg


Increasing the size of the flukes is the obvious way to solve these anchors' key problem, in that they simply don't offer enough holding power. Recent designs such as the Australian design posted above by someone else are an example of this. However it's not a new concept - consider the Victory's anchors:

stbdbow.jpg


While these are certainly more effective than smaller fluked Fishermans in soft sand or mud, the larger the fluke is the more likely one is to have problems setting the anchor in very hard sand or weed. A compromise then, a flawed concept that is a dead-end in design terms.

It should be understood at this point that these anchor designs are almost exclusively intended for fairly large ships. Private sailboats were not popular, or did not exist at all, until recently. To illustrate this point, Baldt, the US Navy anchor suppliers, tell a story of one Captain Hawke of the Royal Navy who "in 1804... applied for an iron stocked anchor for his ship and was derided, but 1807 permitted the use of iron stocks in anchors of not over 1500 pounds." This weight was considered small. We are talking about a very different world, where anchors commonly weigh a tonne or more.

This is an important although very poorly understood point, because anchor design changes very much depending on the scale in question. The optimum anchor for a small model boat is very different to that for a 12m yacht is very different to that for a large ship.

Stop for a moment and let me re-iterate this. You cannot scale anchor design! It does not work. For example, we produce "small boat anchors", in a range between 4Kg and 110Kg. This is a fairly small range in the greater context, but we are still forced to make differences between the various sizes! In fact, although the differences are subtle and difficult to detect to the untrained eye, the Rocna design goes through three versions in the models between the 4 and 110.

Moving on, it is only recently in history that someone realized that scaling down these larger designs (e.g. Fishermans), more or less effective for their designed applications, did not work for the private yachts and launches that were becoming more and more popular. The CQR, from 1933, gets the credit for the first "small boat anchor". And its current popularity is a result of the fact that it met a huge demand.

However, the first attempt was not perfect, and the CQR has as many problems as it solves. Hence the other small boat anchor designs over the last century - and the continued popularity of the Fishermans! E.g. it is fair to say that a Fishermans will work better in weed or even very hard sand, since the plow simply won't set.

testing_plow_dragging.jpg


I should also note here that there has never been a huge amount of resources invested in small boat anchors. Military and commercial interest is in larger anchors, and the results are visible on every Navy ship one sees. There simply (still) isn't enough demand for the smaller stuff, so the designs that one sees are actually fairly amateur. That's not to imply they are not done by professionals with experience in their field, but trust us when we say no one has ever invested millions into developing their new anchor type!

This is why people like Alain and ourselves come up with better yet designs, that account for all this history, and attempt to provide better general purpose anchors.

It is up to the sailors of the world to decide whether they are (better) or not. However, those who cling to the fabled Fishermans, and even plows, based on the lore of traditionalists, are not being reasonable. These sailors use as arguments the evident popularity and longevity of the older types. Such comments always come from those without first hand knowledge, and might I suggest that such naysayers should take note of the feedback from those who do in fact have the relevent experience.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

Hi again Charlie..

[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue"> we use what we use because we trust them, </span>

[/ QUOTE ]
Well a good reason.. but it doesn’t mean that it is a better anchor..

[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue"> manufacturers / designers touting their wares, have a vested interest </span>

[/ QUOTE ]
Manufacturers Yes.. ( former ) Designer NO… this is just a good excuse to say that, as a former anchor designer, my comments are biased.. but as you may have seen, I’m not advocating for any specific brand.. but just talking about “ Modern ” anchors..

[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue"> It seems to me that you are suggesting that we don't know what we are talking about? That, it seems to me is not a good way to get people, (potential customers) on side </span>

[/ QUOTE ]

This is contradictory.. I don’t know why I will care “to get people, ( potential customers ) on side” as I do not sell anything.. so, no “potential customer”.. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif and I strongly believe that you perfectly know what your are talking about ..

and this is why I kindly suggested you “ to take up the gauntlet: ’..

If your are really so strongly convinced that the Fisherman anchor YOU use in the conditions YOU have will win.. why not accepting the challenge??

Happy anchoring

Alain

( nice photos Craig, and happy birthday .. /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif)
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

talk about a one track record. you keep banging on that your anchors are the best for everyone everywhere and we are all numbskulls to use anything different.

Has it ever occured to you guys that your approach to this is probably counterproductive?

getting peoples backs up is probably not the best way to win them over.personally I will continue to use what works.A good indication of which anchor suits a particular place is to look at what the charter angling boats use.Those guys anchor more in a week than most of us do in a lifetime.

In our neck of the woods the bruce seems popular with them.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

It seems to me that the 'emotive' posters on this subject tend more to be what Alain call the 'traditionalists'.

Alain and Craigs posts are generally informative on the matter.

I don't think I have seen any of their posts that say 'you must change because they are better', but for people deciding on their next anchor for whatever reason, they put forward a good case for considering a modern design anchor.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

There posts may be informative and well researched but research by a manufacturer will allways favour what they manufacture or not be published.

Spades / Rocnas and other modern versions are good but not exclusively so for every situation.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

Of course, but that does not mean to say that it is not worth listening to what they have to say.

Anecdotal evidence and experience of their anchors is very limited in the UK. If you take away Alain and Craig's posts there will be even less information available, and the 'traditionalists' win because no other choice is apparent.

The like of SAIL tests etc. are presumably more independant, and although have shortcomings themselves in the way they are done, they still show the new generation in a good light.

Don't ge me wrong - I am not against reading both points of view, but too many people seem to want to rididule and belittle what Alain and Craig have to say. Let people make their own minds up based on informed debate.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue"> It seems to me that the 'emotive' posters on this subject tend more to be what Alain call the 'traditionalists'. </span>


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Pye-end..


[ QUOTE ]
<span style="color:blue"> ...research by a manufacturer will allways favour what they manufacture </span>

[/ QUOTE ]

it seems that most poeple doesn't want to understand that I do not manufacture (and sell) anything..
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

happened to be reading an old PBO anchoring test earlier - Spade 1, Delta 2 brittany and plough last............

Bruce popular with charter angling boats becasue (1) it's damm cheap (they use copies!) (2) they go oversize for holding but use little chain (3) they work well with Alderney ring recovery and (4) they go in a bucket on deck with the rode .............not great role models for cruising yachts.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

could another reason be that 5,they dont drag often? In the competitive world of charter angling boats anything that pees off the anglers (such a anchor dragging) cant be allowed.

But of course us yachties know better than men who go to sea 5 or 6 days a week.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

I don't think that they are counterproductive. Irritating maybe, but counterproductive, no. They had me crawling all over my boat last week trying to find a space, within easy reach of the bow, large enough to hold a Manson or a Rocna. (My stumpy 15 kg Bruces fit in the anchor locker, but are probably not up to a real blow.) Guess I'll have to settle for an oversized Fortress as a back-up.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

Graham, I think you are wasting your breath, those that replied to what I said in my posts didn't I think really read what I was saying, they replied to what they thought I was saying, I told Alain P. that he may well have designed a useful anchor, but the point I think he is missing is, that it has no history of usage around these parts, mainly because we use what we trust, and know. So then I get labelled "Tradionalist" well yes, I suppose I am, but I aint a bloody Ostrich! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

The other point I think they didn't quite grasp was that the anchors I carry on my boat are there, because I know they work, for all the conditions I am likely to meet around here, and most other places really.

The other salient point is that I cannot afford to spend money on new anchors, just cos some yotty magazine says they are good! Beating me over the head with historical and very nicely presented piccies, does not convince me to want to buy anything. also, trying to belittle someones opinion, because it doesn't fall in line with their thinking is not gonna win .em any customers.

This Naysayer, stands by what he said, for the reasons outlined above.

Best, to all Charlie.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

[ QUOTE ]
'scuse I, everybody, should I keep my Fishermanss or not?

[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but.. who are you? /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

PS - I'll have it if you don't want it.
 
Re: But seriously though, folks, the fisherman\'s anchor

i keep my fishermans 'cos it came with the boat, when Grandpa bought it in 1935. Kind of suits her. Hasn't let me down, but the nature of the boat and the nature of my sailing means that I am never going to be relying on it in a full gale in an exposed anchorage. In such conditions the boat will be in a harbour and I will be in a pub, drinking the extraordinary money that people seem to want for modern anchors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top