Dragging of anchors

[noelex]

Generally most long distance cruising boats that anchor frequently recognise that their anchor is far from perfect. I would not rate the typical satisfaction level as high.

Most skippers would like to be able to anchor in poorer substrates, at shorter scopes and in stronger wind with more security than they can presently. Many have plans for upgrades, aimed at achieving anchoring nirvana.

 

[RupertW]

That's basically the same concept as "You always find things in the last place you look". Nobody sticks with an anchor they perceive to be inadequate, therefore everybody perceives their anchor to be adequate.

Exactly

 

[GHA]

Generally most long distance cruising boats that anchor frequently recognise that their anchor is far from perfect. I would not rate the typical satisfaction level as high.

Most skippers would like to be able to anchor in poorer substrates, at shorter scopes and in stronger wind with more security than they can presently. Many have plans for upgrades, aimed at achieving anchoring nirvana.

Absolutely 100%

It's a never ending process.

 

[GHA]

Exactly

Not with the majority of long term cruisers living on the hook for years. Noelex nailed it. Bias for whatever hook is at the end of the chain doesn't exist, just real world experience being updated every anchorage every night and the hook is towards guilty til proven innocent every time it digs in.

 

[thinwater]

"Most skippers would like to be able to anchor in poorer substrates, at shorter scopes and in stronger wind with more security than they can presently. Many have plans for upgrades, aimed at achieving anchoring nirvana."

"Nobody sticks with an anchor they perceive to be inadequate, therefore everybody perceives their anchor to be adequate."

Conflicting, but classic insights into the human brain. I even believe both can be true. I believe I have sorted my ground tackle for each boat to a relatively high efficiency, but I still seek the grail.

 

[zoidberg]

Related to anchoring, not just for depth but also for 'nature of bottom' hence an insight into holding....

There's a legacy of those days with the printing onto HO charts of indicators of the nature of the bottom - 'S', 'Sh', 'M'.... and so on. Who pays attention?

 

[GHA]

There's a legacy of those days with the printing onto HO charts of indicators of the nature of the bottom - 'S', 'Sh', 'M'.... and so on. Who pays attention?

Cruisers do. Fanatically!

But there are many sources with much better info than just a chart, cruising guides, noonsite, active captain etc and perhaps one of the most reliable - google earth on a tablet at happy hour picking the brains of fellow cruisers.

 

[Kukri]

Related to anchoring, not just for depth but also for 'nature of bottom' hence an insight into holding....

There's a legacy of those days with the printing onto HO charts of indicators of the nature of the bottom - 'S', 'Sh', 'M'.... and so on. Who pays attention?

I claim to be the recipient of a very fine back handed compliment, in "Triumph and Tribulation":

"Andrew swung the lead like a professional, whirling it over his head in complete circles before releasing it; I feared lest it should go through the deck..."

It is to be remembered that the writer was Major HW Tilman, CBE, DSO, MC and bar...

 

[NormanS]

Just a bit of "old anchor" stuff which some people don't know.

As we all know, there is an eye on the back of the CQR. That isn't there to tie the buoy rope to, although you can use it for that. It's the CQR's equivalent of the "gravity band" that was usual on the yacht sizesa of the old big Admiralty pattern / fisherman pattern anchors that the CQR put out of business. The gravity band is so called because it provides an eye to hook a tackle onto at the point of balance of the anchor.

To explain I need to go back into Olde Worlde Seamanship - you handled a big ship's stocked anchor by hooking the cat tackle into the ring and hauling it up to the cathead, and then hooking the fish tackle onto a fluke and hauling that up (take a look at HMS Victory!) but yachts kept their anchors on deck, unstocked, and got them there by hooking the anchor davit tackle (or a Spanish burton from the lower cap, if you went in for Claud Worth's newfangled notions) onto the eye on the gravity band on the anchor.

The CQR's gravity eye is for picking up the anchor with. Splice a fathom or so of rope onto the eye. When you have the anchor at the bow, fish up the line with the boathook and use that to pick up the anchor and get it on deck. It won't try to bite your fingers, and you can handle up to a 75lbs CQR this way.

What this means is that it is relatively easy to use a bigger CQR anchor than is recommended for your boat, even if you don't stow it on the roller. Given the price differential between a big secondhand genuine CQR and a new generation anchor, if you are counting the pennies you go for a secondhand oversized CQR.

But why would anyone go through all that palaver with a CQR, when with a decent set up, the anchor will come up and stow on the bow roller?

My previous boat which had a fabricated CQR (type) of 140lb, was always brought up directly on to the bow roller, without rigging cat tackles etc.

 

[zoidberg]

But why would anyone go through all that palaver..... My previous boat which had a fabricated CQR (type) of 140lb, was always brought up directly on to the bow roller, without rigging cat tackles etc.

You need a nimble boy for that, dangled over the stemhead. It's 'character-forming'......

 

[Neeves]

From the thread, and it is hardly statistically sound, most people are more than happy with their existing anchor(s) as reports of them dragging are, rather, thin. But this may reflect the idea no-one wants to admit they bought a lemon. It may also reflect people don't think/believe changing the anchor is necessarily the answer, or its not worth the money. Consequently the idea that long term cruisers get together and discuss their experiences seems most unlikely as they have already made their decisions before they became long term cruisers, or very soon thereafter. Only those straight off the land with virtually no experience and straight into their voyage round the world will be lacking in anecdotes - and they will have read these and other similar threads. Hopefully if they are relying on these threads -they are not pig headed!

Basically what we read now, what comments are already available is the current state of art. There is an absence of balanced comment on the newer models, those that have not be rigorously tested, Vulcan, Scoop etc come to mind.

My additional input is that people who do find themselves inadequately kitted out, when they get to Tahiti, Skye, Piraeus or or Labrador might have a wish list but their actual purchase is based on what they can get not what they want. Once you get to out of the way places delivery of an anchor is a major logistical exercise (and Spade are very difficult to buy in Chile but much easier in French Polynesia) - in fact any modern anchor is difficult in Chile. Obviously if you are a long term cruiser restricted to Europe - different rules apply - but then the anchor is not so important - there are marinas, good forecasts, detailed cruising guides, more detailed charts, better weather etc Many places outside Europe and the N Americas have never been charted, at all, (other than shore line) and equally as many places the seabed is simply charted by running lead lines 150 years ago - and then imaginatively extrapolated.

Long term cruisers, as opposed to long term liveaboards, tend to be more cautious (and less dogmatic) than on this forum and some at least carry an arsenal of anchors (and shore lines) - appreciating anchors are compromise. The most I have 'met' was seven full sized versions, of which 2 were genuine Danforth and they, at the time, had been making a slow circumnavigation, were halfway round - after 12 years.

There is no one ideal, evidence suggests most long term cruisers carry at least 3 as a minimum, all different - which suggests most long term cruisers have doubts and are definitely hedging their bets (or are admitting they bought lemons? ). It also suggests that maybe they have dragged - and realise the value of alternative designs.

Jonathan

 

[JumbleDuck]

From the thread, and it is hardly statistically sound, most people are more than happy with their existing anchor(s) as reports of them dragging are, rather, thin. But this may reflect the idea no-one wants to admit they bought a lemon.

Or it could just mean that most anchors work well enough. I suspect a lot of confirmation bias in reports of new anchors - who is going to admit that the latest shiny isn't actually much better than the old galvanised?

There is no one ideal, evidence suggests most long term cruisers carry at least 3 as a minimum, all different - which suggests most long term cruisers have doubts and are definitely hedging their bets (or are admitting they bought lemons? ). It also suggests that maybe they have dragged - and realise the value of alternative designs.

I suspect that it's more a case of different designs for different places. I am happy with my CQR but bought a Fortress as a kedge in case I ever go somewhere with soft mud. It used to be traditional for Scottish yachts to carry a big Fisherman anchor because it could penetrate, or get a hold of, kelp, but I think that's uncommon now.

 

[NormanS]

Or it could just mean that most anchors work well enough. I suspect a lot of confirmation bias in reports of new anchors - who is going to admit that the latest shiny isn't actually much better than the old galvanised?



I suspect that it's more a case of different designs for different places. I am happy with my CQR but bought a Fortress as a kedge in case I ever go somewhere with soft mud. It used to be traditional for Scottish yachts to carry a big Fisherman anchor because it could penetrate, or get a hold of, kelp, but I think that's uncommon now.

I agree entirely, except that I still carry a big Fisherman anchor, "just in case", although to be honest, it's years now since it was in the water.
I find it quite chuckleworthy that some people base their choice of anchor on what is deemed to be fashionable at the moment, as evidenced by which shiny article is gracing the bows of Marina dwellers, - the very people who are not relying on their anchors.

 

[Gryphon2]

Can I make a suggestion for using old climbing rope for a snubber when anchoring in swelly or squally conditions. It acts like knicker elastic ....much more so than any nylon rope at the chandlers. I have also used it for various other situations where a bit of give is useful, for example as a preventer. Climbers will give it to you free after a few years when there no longer keen on risking their lives to it.

 

[Kukri]

Can I make a suggestion for using old climbing rope for a snubber when anchoring in swelly or squally conditions. It acts like knicker elastic ....much more so than any nylon rope at the chandlers. I have also used it for various other situations where a bit of give is useful, for example as a preventer. Climbers will give it to you free after a few years when there no longer keen on risking their lives to it.

Good point. What we non-climbing folks need is an Enterprising Person to buy old climbing rope from climbers and sell it on eBay or whatever.

 

[Motor_Sailor]

Go on the UK Climbing forums (https://www.ukclimbing.com) and simply ask who's got an old rope available.

The very latest generation rope have the core and sheath interwoven making them more resistant to chafe which traditionally is the problem with climbing ropes. This is because some full strength ropes are amazingly thin these days (less than 9mm diameter). But it's still worth remembering to make your snubber fast as far forward as possible (ideally on a cleat on the deck edge) and use plenty of leather antichafe. Let the snubber do it's work out in the clear air and under water.

 

[RupertW]

Go on the UK Climbing forums (https://www.ukclimbing.com) and simply ask who's got an old rope available.

The very latest generation rope have the core and sheath interwoven making them more resistant to chafe which traditionally is the problem with climbing ropes. This is because some full strength ropes are amazingly thin these days (less than 9mm diameter). But it's still worth remembering to make your snubber fast as far forward as possible (ideally on a cleat on the deck edge) and use plenty of leather antichafe. Let the snubber do it's work out in the clear air and under water.

Interesting about climbing ropes - I combine a rubber snubber with a long nylon warp so I can get elasticity in a short length and under low loads but it would be better to have a more elastic rope.

Not sure about snubber attached as far forward as possible though - our boat veers about a lot and one thing that makes it settle (and therefore minimise large angle pulls and snatch loads on the anchor) is deliberately setting the snubber asymmetrically so the boat is at a slight angle to the wind.

 

[Neeves]

Good point. What we non-climbing folks need is an Enterprising Person to buy old climbing rope from climbers and sell it on eBay or whatever.

Not at all

Climbing gyms, or those here, must retired their ropes to a specific time scheduler or after a major fall (cannot understand how they have a fall - they are geared up that this should not happen). Most walls here use 15m ropes but a few use 30m ropes.

They have an issue with disposal - they cannot sell them and they must ensure they are not used for climbing (or a height application). I've been recycling them for years now, I usually contribute to the tea fund. We now use 30m arms for our bridle. We have a complete set of 30m spares, so use 2 and carry 2 more. I have 4 x 15m ropes I have now retired (but may chop one up to use as safety harness tethers. I use one of the retired ropes as a dinghy painter. Recycling appeals to my Scots parsimony.

I've mentioned this previously. We attach at the transom and run through the stanchion bases to a turning block on each bow, I specially installed for this application. They meet at the bow roller (in the forward centre of our bridge deck). Our sidedecks are about 10m long and its 6m between hulls - so each side is about 14/15m. Normally we simply attach the chain hook and that's it -so the bridle does not sit far forward, even though its 14/15m long.

You could do something very similar on a mono with a snubber - all you need to does work out how to get it outboard at the bow from the side deck(s) plural if you have a beamy yacht. If you have a furler you already have a furling line running up the deck - this will be no different. Just watch for chafe. If you have a deck length snubber this will be about the right length most of the time and you will never need worry about it touching the seabed, and the chain calling off. If you ever need to extend, as we do - you will only do this when its character forming - and the snubber will always be under tension - and again - never on the seabed.

At the transom we had a clutch we don't use, for a self tacking jib (we have a genoa now) and I installed another clutch on the other transom. The bridle arms are then taken through the clutches to a block on the transom and secured to headsail winches in the cockpit. In stronger winds we can deploy extra bridle by running down the side-deck, take off the chain lock, releasing more chain then easing out the bridle (and re-attaching the chain lock). We have found this is better than trying to work out how to add a storm bridle.

We leave our bridle permanently attached and the spare cordage is simply stored in bags, as you would your sheets.

Jonathan

Our ropes are dynamic ropes, 11mm. None of the gyms here use 9mm rope. They will not suffer from any weather or grit degradation - as they are used indoors. The construction is so complex you cannot splice them, or mere mortals cannot splice them. we use halyard knot (with 3 turns), to a shackle to the chain hook , and then whip the loose end, or tail to the respective arm.

 

[JumbleDuck]

Can I make a suggestion for using old climbing rope for a snubber when anchoring in swelly or squally conditions. It acts like knicker elastic ....much more so than any nylon rope at the chandlers.

Only up to a point. Climbing rope is designed to extend plastically (ie non-recoverably) after a major fall, because the climber on the end of it need to lose a lot of energy and not bounce around like Gromit cleaning windows. As long as you load it lightly your should be fine, but one good yank and all that nice elasticity has gone. How much of a yank? Well, a 70kg human falling 20m has 14kJ to get rid off, which is the same as a 4-tonne yacht moving at 2.6kt, so well inside a believable ballpark.

Neeves has elegantly summarised the other issues.

 

[Motor_Sailor]

You have to be careful about buying climbing ropes from climbing walls (or gyms). In nearly every case these are set up as 'top ropes' where the dynamic requirements are very different from 'lead ropes' used in outdoor climbing. 'Top ropes' at a wall simply prevent a slip becoming a fall. The degree of how 'dynamic' a fall is in the climbing world is denoted by its 'fall factor', which is the distance a climber falls divided by the amount of rope in play. At a wall you would typically expect a fall of no more than .5m where there will be a minimum of 15m of rope in play. This gives a Fall Factor of .03. Even with the most incompetent belayer, who has fallen asleep whilst being supervised by a blind person, the Fall Factor when top roping can never exceed 1. The ropes chosen for a wall tend to be thick, with some (adequate) stretch and good abrasion resistance when running all day long through the top belay karabiner. It's this wear plus the 'friction' through the belay device when lowering a climber that dictates the life of such a rope.

In real climbing, it's all about softly catching long leader falls and everything is predicated on a Fall Factor 2. Technically, the system could hold a 100m fall on a 50m rope without imparting a fatal shock on the climber. (If you didn't hit anything on the way down). Different disciplines within climbing may prioritise different qualities in the rope, with for example, winter ice climbers wanting extremely low shock loads in the system (plus lightness, ease of handling when frozen and are prepared to sacrifice durability, etc) when choosing their ropes. The life of an outdoor climbing rope can be very short if even part of it is subject to a number Fall Factor 2s, and more generally by abrasion on rough rock and particularly rock edges.

Most climbers own personal ropes will be fully dynamic and ideal for snubbers. Ropes from walls or cast offs from the Roped Access Industry require a bit more knowledge to be sure what you are getting. The generic term 'climbing rope' covers quite a complex topic.