Dragging anchor

[geem]

This afternoon a squall came through. Just 3 boats in the anchorage. A french boat that had trouble anchoring when they arrived and a Yank boat, Sabre 36. We got chatting to the owners of the Sabre earlier in the day on the beach.
We noticed the wind was up to 25kts and the French boat was off, dragging. The Sabre was unattended. No dinghy. It was heading for the reef side on dragging it's anchor. We jumped in the dinghy and whizzed over. My wife manned the anchor and I started the engine. Up came the anchor and a badly weeded up Rocna on the end. We motored forward with some difficulty getting the boat to turn through the wind! (Didn't know it was that hard in only 25kts on some boats)
The windlass was one of those vertical ones. I hate them. I couldn't find a handle to free drop so my wife had to motor the chain out. I did my best to drop back slowly on an unfamiliar boat. 100ft of chain in 20ft of water and the anchor didn't hold! Up it comes again and we motored to a more shelter spot where it was a lot shallower and dropped al the chain. We left the boat there. 5 mins later, the owners returned.
They were grateful we had saved the boat but still waiting for the bottle of wine to say thank you.
I was surprised the Rocna was so bad in weed. It did reming me why I sold the one that came with our boat and bought a Spade. If only Spade could cure the corrosion problem.
We are anchored with 4:1 scope. It never crossed my mind that we would drag in only 25kts.
Edit: just to clarify, we didn't drag. Only the boat with the Rocna and what ever the French boat was using for an anchor

 

[vyv_cox]

Quite difficult to understand why that would be. Other than the roll bar the shape of Rocna and Spade is not enormously different and I don't see why the roll bar should affect weed performance.

We don't often anchor in heavy weed but when we do the Rocna seems to perform well enough. I found it considerably better than the Knox I tested when I deliberately sought out weedy places.

 

[geem]

Quite difficult to understand why that would be. Other than the roll bar the shape of Rocna and Spade is not enormously different and I don't see why the roll bar should affect weed performance.

We don't often anchor in heavy weed but when we do the Rocna seems to perform well enough. I found it considerably better than the Knox I tested when I deliberately sought out weedy places.

The couple that returned to their boat decided to re anchor in a location close to where they dragged. It's hot here now we are approaching summer. They wanted more breeze. It took them 2 goes to get the anchor to set. It's all seagrass on the bottom. I couldn't get it to set. They couldn't get it to set. It dragged. By comparison to my Spade, it performs poorly in the seagrass we have here.
On occasion I have given our boat full revs in reverse and pulled the anchor out. Presumably it had a tentative hold in the thick seagrass. It hasn't happened often. The Rocna wouldn't hold at all in the breeze. It just never got an initial set. I never used any revs to power set it. I didn't see the owners power setting. That may have been their mistake initially and shows the benefit of power setting to ensure you have sufficient hold to deal with an increase in wind strength. We power set routinely. We have a 4.4 litre engine and 22" prop. We can exert a lot of force when power setting

 

[Neeves]

There is weed and weed....any of which we try, sometimes with no success, to avoid.

Rocna Resetting Failures and evaluation of Vulcan and Mantus

Our background to roll bar anchors is defined below.

Anchor Resetting Tests - Practical Sailor

Today - if you have doubts on a roll bar anchors there are a multitude of options, Spade, Excel, Vulcan, Kobra, Epsilon etc. Personally I don't see the need for a roll bar - but in their day 'roll bars' were 'de rigour'.

It is interesting that many manufacturers of roll bar anchor, in their day kept on the high alter of performance, now make a non roll bar model. In those days we were mocked for our choice of an Excel and Spade rarely raised a mention. How times change.

The marketing power of the roll bar is enormous - we now have a highly reputable company, Lewmar, offering their state of the art anchor - with or without a roll bar (and no explanation given). If the plain unadorned anchor needs no roll bar - why offer one as an option - makes no sense (but then I prefer simple problems)

Jonathan

 

[rogerthebodger]

Its all about personal preference

Some people think a roll bar are the best think since sliced bread others don't see any advantage.

Its all about increasing you market by offering both so you cater for both markets

 

[geem]

Its all about personal preference

Some people think a roll bar are the best think since sliced bread others don't see any advantage.

Its all about increasing you market by offering both so you cater for both markets

I don't get it. Its not like you are buying a new car and you are offered an options list. An anchor is a device that when deployed you don't see unless you dive down and have a look. If the anchor needs a rollbar to work then it should have one. If it doesn't need one ( like a Spade) then when is one being offered? Does it or doesn't it need a roll bar to work? It's stupid to offer one if it doesn't need one. Either they don't know if it needs one or they do and people are buying anchors as a fashion choice. Also very stupid

 

[rogerthebodger]

The personal preference is all about if you think an anchor is better with a roll bat or not

i.e do you think a boat owner thinks an anchor with a roll bar sets or resets better than an anchor without a roll bar

The sea bed that the anchor nounally used also depends on the personal chose

 

[noelex]

If it doesn't need one ( like a Spade) then when is one being offered? Does it or doesn't it need a roll bar to work? It's stupid to offer one if it doesn't need one. Either they don't know if it needs one or they do and people are buying anchors as a fashion choice. Also very stupid

Thanks for the report. The Rocna is a very good anchor, but unfortunately contrary to what you sometimes read on this forum new generation anchors do sometimes drag.

The Rocna uses the rollbar to obtain the correct setting position. The anchor would not reliably set correctly if this was removed.

The Spade is a quite different design. It uses a large amount of ballast to ensure the anchor adopts the correct setting position. This design would not benefit from a roll bar.

Both approaches have their advantages and drawbacks. The large ballast chamber of the Spade is an impediment to penetrating the substrate and results in an anchor with a smaller fluke area for the same overall weight. Likewise the rollbar of the Rocna dose not help penetration. Surprisingly both these very different approaches have resulted in excellent anchors that perform well for most users.

There are other design options that remove both the bulky ballast chamber and the rollbar. This provides potentially better penetration, but without these aids the setting reliability can be diminished. Still, we are seeing many exciting new designs often using quite small ballast chambers with large curved shanks and other design tricks to replace the rollbar. Examples are the Mantus M2 and the Vulcan (developed by Rocna). These have primarily been produced because the manufacturers’` existing rollbar designs will not fit on some boats, but it will be interesting to see developments of these ideas.

 

[geem]

The personal preference is all about if you think an anchor is better with a roll bat or not

i.e do you think a boat owner thinks an anchor with a roll bar sets or resets better than an anchor without a roll bar

The sea bed that the anchor nounally used also depends on the personal chose

No way. I expect the anchor manufacturer to research the hell out of the anchor he has designed. I expect him to test it in every kind of seabed possible before he puts it in to production. I expect him to have test data and use that to refine his design until it works. He needs to decide if he is designing a roll bar anchor or a none roll bar anchor. It's part of the design development.
The fact that Lewmar gives a choice is ridiculous. Do they have no confidence in their product? Why not offer it with choice of colours as well? Maybe a cloth finish or leather option!
If Lewmar can't decide if it needs a roll bar or not, it sends a signal that there is a confidence issue with the anchor. If they are not confident as the manufacturer, how do they expect the public to be confident in their product?
Lewmar are up against some stiff competition in the new generation market. Their new anchor needs to be a whole lot better than the Delta.

 

[rogerthebodger]

I agree with you but these days manufacturing companies are not run by engineers which would do what you recommend. Most big compaaines are run by accountants who are interest in market share and profit for their share holders.

One of the reasons I left the UK 40 years ago

 

[vyv_cox]

Lewmar are up against some stiff competition in the new generation market. Their new anchor needs to be a whole lot better than the Delta.

I used Deltas for 25+ years and had very few problems with it, dragging in soft mud being its only serious downfall. In the vast majority of anchoring events its Rocna replacement is not noticeably better, although I exclude soft mud and probably gale force winds from that. It is perhaps the most common anchor seen in the Mediterranean and remains a good choice for many.

 

[geem]

I used Deltas for 25+ years and had very few problems with it, dragging in soft mud being its only serious downfall. In the vast majority of anchoring events its Rocna replacement is not noticeably better, although I exclude soft mud and probably gale force winds from that. It is perhaps the most common anchor seen in the Mediterranean and remains a good choice for many.

Not so good here. Many people use them though. The anchor that drags the most here is the Delta. We don't see many CQRs any more but still plenty of Deltas. I was surprised how poor the Rocna was in the thick seagrass though.

 

[noelex]

The fact that Lewmar gives a choice is ridiculous.

The Epsilon with its removable rollbar is an interesting move by Lewmar. I agree it is not ideal.

There are three possible reasons I can envisage for this approach.

1. The model works better with the rollbar, but still performs adequately without. By offering both options the manufacturer can sell the anchor to boat owners who have a bow roller arrangement that will accommodate a rollbar and owners where the rollbar will not fit.
2. The performance of the anchor may be better in some substrates with the rollbar and some without. Making the rollbar removable covers both options.
3. The rollbar did not result in better performance and was offered just to make the anchor appear more like the popular Rocna.

I have not seen the Epsilon anchor enough to form an opinion on its performance with or without the rollbar, but personally I suspect reason three is unlikely. The company has more integrity than that.

 

[geem]

The Epsilon with its removable rollbar is an interesting move by Lewmar. I agree it is not ideal.

There are three possible reasons I can envisage for this approach.

1. The model works better with the rollbar, but still performs adequately without. By offering both options the manufacturer can sell the anchor to boat owners who have a bow roller arrangement that will accommodate a rollbar and owners where the rollbar will not fit.
2. The performance of the anchor may be better in some substrates with the rollbar and some without. Making the rollbar removable covers both options.
3. The rollbar did not result in better performance and was offered just to make the anchor appear more like the popular Rocna.

I have not seen the Epsilon anchor enough to form an opinion on its performance with or without the rollbar, but personally I suspect reason three is unlikely. The company has more integrity than that.

The worse marketing move ever. If thr anchor is better with a roll bar it should have one fixed. Rocna completely redesigned to come up with the Vulcan. Having seen one in the flesh I was surprised how large it is for its weight. My Spade of the same weight looks small but it works very well. If I need to anchor in gloomy mud we have a huge Fortress. This is where small fluke anchors are at a disadvantage. Thr smaller fluke won't get a grip in gloop

 

[Tranona]

The Epsilon with its removable rollbar is an interesting move by Lewmar. I agree it is not ideal.

There are three possible reasons I can envisage for this approach.

1. The model works better with the rollbar, but still performs adequately without. By offering both options the manufacturer can sell the anchor to boat owners who have a bow roller arrangement that will accommodate a rollbar and owners where the rollbar will not fit.
2. The performance of the anchor may be better in some substrates with the rollbar and some without. Making the rollbar removable covers both options.
3. The rollbar did not result in better performance and was offered just to make the anchor appear more like the popular Rocna.

I have not seen the Epsilon anchor enough to form an opinion on its performance with or without the rollbar, but personally I suspect reason three is unlikely. The company has more integrity than that.

I am more sceptical than you - I suspect it is more likely the third option as the primary reason, but the other 2 may also be true. When I was doing my research before buying the Epsilon I could find no guidance from Lewmar on when it is advantageous to fit the roll bar. In fact as I observed in another thread their published guidance on anchors is not helpful, using the same recommendation chart for all three of their anchors which each perform in very different ways. Rocna are upfront that the rollbar is there to help orientation when setting, just as was claimed for the Bugel and its clones. other designs including their Vulcan do not need the roll bar.

You have to remember the biggest volume buyers of anchors are the major boat builders, who mostly buy Deltas. The after market retail buyers are much more diverse and although a few nerds like the ones here may want to understand what they are buying, the vast majority buy what they see others using or what is in the chandlers racks. I stood behind a couple buying an anchor the other day. They had a little guidance from the salesman mainly in answering questions, but the decider was based on lifting it off the rack with the comment "looks and feels right to me"

 

[geem]

I am more sceptical than you - I suspect it is more likely the third option as the primary reason, but the other 2 may also be true. When I was doing my research before buying the Epsilon I could find no guidance from Lewmar on when it is advantageous to fit the roll bar. In fact as I observed in another thread their published guidance on anchors is not helpful, using the same recommendation chart for all three of their anchors which each perform in very different ways. Rocna are upfront that the rollbar is there to help orientation when setting, just as was claimed for the Bugel and its clones. other designs including their Vulcan do not need the roll bar.

You have to remember the biggest volume buyers of anchors are the major boat builders, who mostly buy Deltas. The after market retail buyers are much more diverse and although a few nerds like the ones here may want to understand what they are buying, the vast majority buy what they see others using or what is in the chandlers racks. I stood behind a couple buying an anchor the other day. They had a little guidance from the salesman mainly in answering questions, but the decider was based on lifting it off the rack with the comment "looks and feels right to me"

That really is scary. No wonder insurance premiums are so high.

 

[rogerthebodger]

but the decider was based on lifting it off the rack with the comment "looks and feels right to me"

As I said personal preference

Not the correct way but true all the same

 

[noelex]

In fact as I observed in another thread their published guidance on anchors is not helpful, using the same recommendation chart for all three of their anchors which each perform in very different ways. Rocna are upfront that the rollbar is there to help orientation when setting, just as was claimed for the Bugel and its clones. other designs including their Vulcan do not need the roll bar.

You have to remember the biggest volume buyers of anchors are the major boat builders, who mostly buy Deltas. The after market retail buyers are much more diverse and although a few nerds like the ones here may want to understand what they are buying, the vast majority buy what they see others using or what is in the chandlers racks. I stood behind a couple buying an anchor the other day. They had a little guidance from the salesman mainly in answering questions, but the decider was based on lifting it off the rack with the comment "looks and feels right to me"

I agree the anchor sizing charts from Lewmar are a bit of a joke. Lewmar dominate the “original equipment” market, as you indicated, and boat builders love companies that are prepared to recommend small anchors. It saves the builder money not only purchasing the anchor, but with all the ancillary equipment such as the windlass, bowsprit etc as these can also be smaller. If the customer complains, the boatbuilder can deflect criticism by pointing out the ”recommended size" has been used.

To be fair, they are not the only company doing this, but I take your point that if they are prepared to stretch the truth (to put it politely) when recommending suitable anchor sizes the marketing department may also have a say in the features incorporated into a new anchor design.

 

[Tranona]

That really is scary. No wonder insurance premiums are so high.

Don't think it has any effect on insurance premiums. Have not seen any real figures but in the UK claims from anchor failure won't even show on common causes of claims. Whatever we think about the importance of anchors on here it is not a reflection of the real world. The vast majority of people don't anchor in conditions that would test even the most basic of anchors so the odd bit of dragging is seen as an inconvenience or better still a topic of conversation in the club bar. You see things differently, just like those of us who went to the Med because of the high dependency on anchoring and the wider range and difficulty of seabeds. The general higher level of insurance premiums for cruising in such locations covers the greater risks one of which is loss or damage from anchoring failure.

For the typical UK leisure sailor who anchors a few times a year in benign conditions a CQR copy is fine. I am reminded of this every time I walk down the pontoon to my boat. The only boats that don't have the CQR, Claw or Danforth that came with them when new, probably 35 years ago are the boats belonging to members who cruise quite seriously (like the Malo 36 that left last weekend to spend the summer cruising the Iberian peninsular). Even then some don't - both my neighbours, one a US built Freedom 33 the owner bought in Puerto Rica 30 years ago and sailed back here, the other a Southerly RS35 which the owner bought new and is out every weekend and a long spell in the summer, have basic size Claw anchors, one a Bruce the other a copy..

 

[geem]

Don't think it has any effect on insurance premiums. Have not seen any real figures but in the UK claims from anchor failure won't even show on common causes of claims. Whatever we think about the importance of anchors on here it is not a reflection of the real world. The vast majority of people don't anchor in conditions that would test even the most basic of anchors so the odd bit of dragging is seen as an inconvenience or better still a topic of conversation in the club bar. You see things differently, just like those of us who went to the Med because of the high dependency on anchoring and the wider range and difficulty of seabeds. The general higher level of insurance premiums for cruising in such locations covers the greater risks one of which is loss or damage from anchoring failure.

For the typical UK leisure sailor who anchors a few times a year in benign conditions a CQR copy is fine. I am reminded of this every time I walk down the pontoon to my boat. The only boats that don't have the CQR, Claw or Danforth that came with them when new, probably 35 years ago are the boats belonging to members who cruise quite seriously (like the Malo 36 that left last weekend to spend the summer cruising the Iberian peninsular). Even then some don't - both my neighbours, one a US built Freedom 33 the owner bought in Puerto Rica 30 years ago and sailed back here, the other a Southerly RS35 which the owner bought new and is out every weekend and a long spell in the summer, have basic size Claw anchors, one a Bruce the other a copy..

Out here in the Caribbean, anchoring is king. There are few other options. The way people sail in European water in mainly associated with a marina berth. It explains why sailors who charter in the Caribbean have no anchoring skills. Boats dragging on reefs out here is a common occurrence. Lots of charter boats but a surprising number of owners as well. The Utube bloggers sell the dream. Numpties buy a boat and have zero idea what they are doing. That is why our insurance is high out here. Claims here are common