Dragging anchor

[Tranona]

Agree - discovered that in my visits to your part of the world in the 1970s. Can't imagine what it is like now with the explosion of activity since then. Not too different when I first went to the eastern Med late 90s at the beginning of the boom (or as some would say the end of paradise!).

In comparison boating in the UK is a doddle for most who don't actually do much because of the shorter season and unpredictable weather Most of the sailing areas (I know Scotland is a bit different) have lots of good anchorages harbours and marinas. Biggest causes of claims are damage from the weather and I believe theft. Premium for my £100k value Bavaria was £550 in commission all year round, £380 for my GH.

 

[Trident]

I can't comment yet on Caribbean anchoring but I bought a Rocna of Geem form my old boat and spent almost 1000 nights at anchor on it with not one single drag. Not in 50 knots winds, not on thick seagrass in the Med, not in soft mud , not ever not anywhere. Only once did it fail to set and that was in Brittany and turned out to be on a solid rock surface - two goes (we couldn't see the bottom ) convinced us to move a hundred yards where it set first time.

For my new boat I went Rocna again and have not seen any issues in any conditions including thick vegetation but then we always power set too. Not mostly, or when bad weather is predicted but every single time - drop in slow reverse, pay out chain, pull back lightly, attach bridle , pull back hard until the chain and bridle run bar tight. I took guidance on the method and the anchor set up in general from the Pardys' study after the big Cabo San Lucas storm and its never failed yet for us and I hope it never will. I am constantly amazed at how poorly almost everyone I see anchors but that's another story! Two dragged in no more that 25 knots in the mud of the Dart last month with no waves to speak of.

I can't say if the Spade is better in weed or not as I've only used one a few times on a friend's boat. I can say that my Fortress Kedge anchor is great in weed. I set it once in heavy weather as a stern anchor to keep in to the waves and in the night (unforcast) the wind flipped and the small Fortress held us from the stern all night in quite good winds in very thick weeds.

In general I think technique is more important than equipment but I'll be even more careful when we find Caribbean weeds until I am used to them!

 

[Sumara of Weymouth]

I don't have a winch on my boat so I find the roll bar on my Rocna the perfect thing to grab to haul the beast up on to the deck. Maybe that is why some makers are offering roll bars as an option?

 

[Kelpie]

Thanks for the report. Another anecdote to file alongside the others which do seem to suggest that the Spade is more reliable than the Rocna.
We've used Rocnas for the last ten years or so, have had a handful of interesting moments since we moved aboard full time. I'm now a little sceptical of the design and pay more attention to where and how I use it.
My own anecdote is that a very similarly sized boat next to us did not drag his 20kg Spade the night we dragged our 25kg Rocna. Hmmm.

 

[noelex]

I can't comment yet on Caribbean anchoring but I bought a Rocna of Geem form my old boat and spent almost 1000 nights at anchor on it with not one single drag. Not in 50 knots winds, not on thick seagrass in the Med, not in soft mud , not ever not anywhere.

Both the Rocna and the steel Spade (the aluminium version is less proficient especially in weed) are excellent anchors, but in thick weed my preference of the two would be slightly for the Rocna. It is more difficult to force the bulky toe of the Spade through weed roots. The rollbar on the Rocna also has some effect, but by the time the rollbar is meeting much resistance the toe has already penetrated through the weed into the substrate below. With the Spade the bulky toe (because if the ballast chamber) has to push past the weed and weed roots before the anchor can start to set.

Having said this, the Mantus M1 is significantly better again with its very thin and tapered fluke together with the high tip weight of 50% (the Spade is similar) which helps the toe initially penetrate.

Their are some specialised weed anchors such as the fisherman pattern that can be excellent, but these are poor general purpose anchors and they do not work as well if the substrate below the weed is soft.

Below is one example of a disappointing result of a Spade in only light weed. This is in 8m of water at 4:1. The anchor had been given every chance to set well, you can just see the long drag mark through the weed in the second photo. The toe had not managed to penetrate and consequently the anchor had not rolled upright.

This is just one example. I have seen poor results from the Rocna in weed also. Weed can be difficult, but overall in weed I would rate the Rocna as the better of the two anchors. This is not to diminish the value of Geems report or his overall experience that his steel Spade performs well in weed.

Thick weed is a very important substrate. I think it is the most common difficult substrate and the one that defeats many otherwise good anchors. Unfortunately, there are very few anchor tests in this type of substrate because variations in the seabed make consistent measurements difficult. Even using my own method of evaluating anchors (which is primarily to observe how they behave in the real world on the seabed), I find weed more difficult. To determine if the anchor has successfully penetrated the weed and started to engage the substrate below I need to use my fingers and feel what is happening rather than just observe. The results are not easy to convey in photographs. For these reasons we should pay attention to reports from cruisers that anchor frequently such as Geem and in this case we need to give a black mark to Rocna.

 

[geem]

Both the Rocna and the steel Spade (the aluminium version is less proficient especially in weed) are excellent anchors, but in thick weed my preference of the two would be slightly for the Rocna. It is more difficult to force the bulky toe of the Spade through weed roots. The rollbar on the Rocna also has some effect, but by the time the rollbar is meeting much resistance the toe has already penetrated through the weed into the substrate below. With the Spade the bulky toe (because if the ballast chamber) has to push past the weed and weed roots before the anchor can start to set.

Having said this, the Mantus M1 is significantly better again with its very thin and tapered fluke together with the high tip weight of 50% (the Spade is similar) which helps the toe initially penetrate.

Their are some specialised weed anchors such as the fisherman pattern that can be excellent, but these are poor general purpose anchors and they do not work as well if the substrate below the weed is soft.

Below is one example of a disappointing result of a Spade in only light weed. This is in 8m of water at 4:1. The anchor had been given every chance to set well, you can just see the long drag mark through the weed in the second photo. The toe had not managed to penetrate and consequently the anchor had not rolled upright.

This is just one example. I have seen poor results from the Rocna in weed also. Weed can be difficult, but overall in weed I would rate the Rocna as the better of the two anchors. This is not to diminish the value of Geems report or his overall experience that his steel Spade performs well in weed.

Thick weed is a very important substrate. I think it is the most common difficult substrate and the one that defeats many otherwise good anchors. Unfortunately, there are very few anchor tests in this type of substrate because variations in the seabed make consistent measurements difficult. Even using my own method of evaluating anchors (which is primarily to observe how they behave in the real world on the seabed), I find weed more difficult. To determine if the anchor has successfully penetrated the weed and started to engage the substrate below I need to use my fingers and feel what is happening rather than just observe. The results are not easy to convey in photographs. For these reasons we should pay attention to reports from cruisers that anchor frequently such as Geem and in this case we need to give a black mark to Rocna.
View attachment 157536



View attachment 157534

Once again we must disagree. In my experience the Spade is far superior in weed. The Rocna doesn't compare. Have you used a Spade in the seagrass we have here in the Caribbean? It may be local thing to the Caribbean but the Spade never fails to deliver and has never dragged in weed, once set. We often power set at full revs in reverse.

 

[noelex]

Once again we must disagree. In my experience the Spade is far superior in weed. The Rocna doesn't compare. Have you used a Spade in the seagrass we have here in the Caribbean? It may be local thing to the Caribbean but the Spade never fails to deliver and has never dragged in weed, once set. We often power set at full revs in reverse.

I don’t have much experience with Caribbean anchorages. I have only spent around 180 nights at anchor and most of this has been in a limited geographic area. I think you have spent far more time at anchor in this area than I have.

Diving I have actually not seen any weed I would classify as thick. There is plenty of weed, but most is the more sparse sea grass that the turtles seem to love eating, or at most what I would describe as light weed that would cause little problem for most anchors. Given your reports I am sure I will see islands with much thicker weed, but not so far.

That is not to say that my impression is that the Caribbean substrates are always very easy. There are patches of dead corally rubble/rock. The rocks are typically not large, but are enough to potentially impede an anchor setting well if it was unlucky enough to catch a rock badly. Anchor performance in patches like this is less predicable than in weed (where I know my anchor does well).

There are also many patches of great looking sand. I have been warned by some cruisers that some of these are just a thin layer of sand above rock, but so far poking around and watching how anchors set this does not seem to be an issue. A friend dragged recently in mild/moderate conditions with a good new generation anchor. From the surface it looked like perfect sand around his boat, but I did not dive on his anchor so rock just below the sand may have been the issue.

The winds so far have been very steady, which is helpful. Almost always from the same direction and without much change in strength. There are some rain squalls, but the rise in wind is mild, much above 30 knots has not been common so far. This is much easier than many other cruising areas, especially for beginners. Even very light wind can be a trap where people can drop their anchor and not realise that the anchor is poorly set, only to drag later with only a light/moderate breeze. The steady breeze ensures that if they are holding when they drop this is likely to remain the case, especially as there is little change in wind direction. So far I have seen much less dragging than in other areas, particularly given the prevalence of charterers.

Every new cruising area has its anchor challenges and I am sure I will experience these, especially as hurricane season develops, but overcoming these particular local hurdles is part of the fun and it always nice to keep learning.

One nice thing about travel is exploring these new environments and this applies just as much to below the surface as above, especially for someone with an interest in anchors.

 

[thinwater]

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"

You see a LOT of tragically, comically undersized Deltas on 6- to 7-figure boat show boats. That's mostly all you see. Weird.

 

[geem]

I don’t have much experience with Caribbean anchorages. I have only spent around 180 nights at anchor and most of this has been in a limited geographic area. I think you have spent far more time at anchor in this area than I have.

Diving I have actually not seen any weed I would classify as thick. There is plenty of weed, but most is the more sparse sea grass that the turtles seem to love eating, or at most what I would describe as light weed that would cause little problem for most anchors. Given your reports I am sure I will see islands with much thicker weed, but not so far.

That is not to say that my impression is that the Caribbean substrates are always very easy. There are patches of dead corally rubble/rock. The rocks are typically not large, but are enough to potentially impede an anchor setting well if it was unlucky enough to catch a rock badly. Anchor performance in patches like this is less predicable than in weed (where I know my anchor does well).

There are also many patches of great looking sand. I have been warned by some cruisers that some of these are just a thin layer of sand above rock, but so far poking around and watching how anchors set this does not seem to be an issue. A friend dragged recently in mild/moderate conditions with a good new generation anchor. From the surface it looked like perfect sand around his boat, but I did not dive on his anchor so rock just below the sand may have been the issue.

One nice thing about travel is exploring these new environments and this applies just as much to below the surface as above, especially for someone with an interest in anchors.

I know several anchorages with flat sections of rock just below sand. There are also,plenty with coral that isn't marked on charts as reefs. Lots of challenges

 

[Tranona]

You see a LOT of tragically, comically undersized Deltas on 6- to 7-figure boat show boats. That's mostly all you see. Weird.

That is partly because of the way the Lewmar sizing chart is laid out. I described earlier my experience with my 2 Bavarias which were essentially the same in terms of their anchor requirements (displacement and windage) but the first was called a 37 (actually 38' long) with long ends, The second was called a 33 (10m long - but now called a 34!) with no overhangs. The 37 came from the factory with a 35lb CQR copy subsequently replaced with a 16kg Delta as 37 is in the middle of the 35lb/16kg range. The 33 came with a 10kg Delta - at the top of the 10kg range.

Why do mass production (and some premium builders) do this? because they know that the vast majority of buyers will never use their anchors in serious situations if at all. The Delta is perfectly adequate for occasional anchoring and those owners that are more adventurous will soon find its limitations and buy a better anchor. You also have to remember that before the anchor revolution (because that is what it is) the equivalent of these boat would be using CQRs, Claws, Danforths, Britannys etc which in almost every way are inferior to a Delta never mind the NG designs. Indeed, many boats are still using those old style anchors that came with the boats 20, 30, 40 years ago.

 

[SimonKNZ]

If you want a little extra peace of mind while ashore, using an app such as Anchor Pro will send you an alert if the boat drags outside a preset area. You can also send a message to the app to make it report status (distance and bearing to anchor)
(Meant to post this to the "going ashore while anchored")

 

[geem]

We never use an anchor alarm. We just use a good anchor and make sure it's set

 

[SimonKNZ]

We never use an anchor alarm. We just use a good anchor and make sure it's set

I do both! Just like I used to use a well-packed main chute but still carry a reserve

 

[noelex]

We never use an anchor alarm. We just use a good anchor and make sure it's set

Having a good anchor and making sure it is set are important factors, so I can understand your emphasis, but why the reluctance to set set an electronic anchor alarm?

It will keep watch 24 hours a day. There is no cost and very little power draw to keep this electronic crew member continually monitoring your position. As a bonus it shows your anchor position which is useful if someone anchors close.

The anchor alarm has saved us on several occasions, so I am convinced of its practical value.

 

[Zing]

I suspect penetrating weed is done better by a heavy anchor. My large Rocna has never dragged and I do anchor a lot in Caribbean weed. Over 6 months a year many years.

 

[robmcg]

what ever the French boat was using for an anchor

Usually a paperclip from my experience .

 

[Neeves]

The anchor alarm has saved us on several occasions, so I am convinced of its practical value.

We are with Geem - we don't use an anchor alarm. We too use a good, or even, 2 good anchors and seldom have neighbours..

Maybe you would like to comment on your final sentence. You imply people, on several occasions, have been a threat.

It would be interesting to hear the background.

Jonathan

 

[fredrussell]

We never use an anchor alarm. We just use a good anchor and make sure it's set

Pride comes before a fall!

 

[geem]

Pride comes before a fall!

We have a wind turbine. If the wind gets up, it makes a racket. It's like an alarm. I would get up and check nobody is dragging into us.

 

[geem]

Having a good anchor and making sure it is set are important factors, so I can understand your emphasis, but why the reluctance to set set an electronic anchor alarm?

It will keep watch 24 hours a day. There is no cost and very little power draw to keep this electronic crew member continually monitoring your position. As a bonus it shows your anchor position which is useful if someone anchors close.

The anchor alarm has saved us on several occasions, so I am convinced of its practical value.

I have never felt the need to set an alarm. My emphasis is on setting the anchor properly with the engine in reverse at high revs. We live at anchor. We have been at anchor since October last year when we returned to the boat from 3 months in the UK. We will be anchoring for the whole summer and won't be in a marina until we are in the Azores in June 2024. We are not nieve. We set the anchor. We often snorkel so will check the anchor is buried. If its set it won't drag. If you feel the need to use an alarm everytime you anchor then maybe you need a better anchor, better setting technique or both
We watch the forecasts and anchor accordingly.
We see terrible anchoring practises often followed by dragging anchors. Get your setup right and sleep soundly, until the wind turbine goes ballistic

Edit: the boat we rescued from hitting the reef had an anchor alarm going off the whole time we were rescuing the boat. It didn't help them seeing as they weren't onboard.