Fortress size for kedge

The Guardians are slightly smaller than the same numbered Fortress and use lighter components, the G23 uses some components from the F16. I guess because it uses smaller components its not as strong. I'd be surprised if you can tell the difference in performance as a result of the difference in fluke size (the difference is small) I think the Guardian is not anodised. As mentioned it has the fixed 32 degree fluke angle, so you lose the advantageous ability of altering the fluke on the Fortress to 45 degrees in mud. Again as mentioned the Guardian omits the tapered shank but it is bevelled. I'd heard that the Guardian fluke was not as sharp - they seem similar to me (both are sharp). The Fortress has a no questions asked lifetime guarantee (though I'm not sure who pays freight) the Guardian warranty I think is 12 months.

On the basis they last forever - I'd pay the extra and get a Fortress.

I make the following comment controversially - I wonder if most people buy oversize and Fortress themselves might encourage this (because they do not want to be found 'under specifying'). Because they are light (and many have a hang up about anchors needing to be 'heavy') do buyers tend to a bigger size, rather than being parsimonious, and going smaller? There is also a tendency to for any 'new' anchor purchase to follow the Big is Better concept. If you look at the holding capacities quoted, in sand - even a size smaller is much 'better' than you should ever need. We find, we have an FX 23 on a 38' cat, that under normal anchor conditions we never get the stock to 'disappear' - in sand (cannot see anything in mud - its too murky). Yet with our steel anchors they invariably are swallowed by the seabed. So if the 'smaller' surface area steel is more than adequate why do we use a bigger alloy one?

I'm not out to engender an argument - just offering an opinion.

I have been unable to test the idea of using, in our case a FX 16 or maybe even FX 11, but its on the list of 'to do'.

Obviously for a hurricane I'd want to have the FX 23 - but how many of us anchor in hurricanes? and how many times do people experience even 50 knots?

The ideal would be to win the lottery and have one big one and one small one - but I'm not a believer in Lotteries.

On chain - we are carrying our FX 23 as a bower, we do use it instead of or as well as the steel anchor on the bow roller. Our rode is 15m 6mm chain and 40m of 3 ply nylon. We keep the rode neatly stored in a milk crate. Basically the rode needs to be a primary rode. If we had a very much smaller Fortress as a kedge I'd be using much less chain. If we were buying from new - we'ed buy anchor plait, much easier to store. The 3 ply is a bit 'stiff', needs care to store in the milk crate. As mentioned the FX 23 is easy to carry about and very easy to deploy from a dinghy.

Jonathan
 
Neeves said:
We find, we have an FX 23 on a 38' cat, that under normal anchor conditions we never get the stock to 'disappear' - in sand (cannot see anything in mud - its too murky). Yet with our steel anchors they invariably are swallowed by the seabed. So if the 'smaller' surface area steel is more than adequate why do we use a bigger alloy one?
Click to expand...

I find much the same. We anchored this season for a few days in winds of about 30 - 35 knots, excellent holding on sand. I put the Fortress FX-16 out at around 60 - 90 degrees from the 15 kg Rocna to make life aboard a little more comfortable. After two days the Rocna was just about totally buried, just the top of the hoop showing. The Fortress was barely buried at all, about half the flukes below the surface. I have seen similar performance previously but this time I took particular interest and photographed them both.
 
One of the regular situations that we use our Fortress for, is when we leave our boat on a Bahamian Moor for four weeks in the Outer Hebrides. When laying the two anchors (in mud), I give each in turn a good pull with the engine, to make sure, and then leave them to do what anchors do. I have never attempted to photograph them, and have no intention ever to dive on them, brrrrrr.

When I come to lift them, it is very obvious that they have been well and totally buried. Indeed, recovering them takes quite a while, and thank goodness I installed a deck-wash pump.

PS. To Neeves. 50 knots is not uncommon, but familiarity doesn't make it any more pleasant.
 
noelex said:
It would be great to see the photos Vyv if you get a chance to post them.
Click to expand...

Taken where we met you last. Water temperature 26 - 27C, so no hardship! Wind speed trace shows past 10 minutes in this view, had been more.
P7150038_zpsatxnlk21.jpg

P7160063_zps7z6yyjuj.jpg

P7110029_zpsokbupmkk.jpg
 
A thought occurred. We set our primary under chain alone, usually at 3:1 and invariably get a good set, we would then extend to 5:1, 7:1 maybe further power set and then add the bridle. Our Fortress is set wish some chain and a lot of nylon. Consequently the load imposed on the Fortress will be considerably less than that on the primary, as the nylon will absorb some of the energy focussed at the Fortress. Our bridle is also 'only' 13m, or so, long - the nylon for our Fortress can be 40m, though would usually be deployed as 30m. Again any loading from the yacht as a result of wind will be more greatly absorbed by the Fortress rode than the primary rode and logically one might expect the anchor subject to 'less' snubbing (the primary) to set more deeply. This also might illustrate why it is important when comparing anchors to not only compare in adjacent seabeds, set by the same person the same way, similarly sized - but using the same rode.

This does not 'negate' the comment that Fortress appear to take more effort to set deeply - so are they too big? Many of us would use a Fortress with a second rode, composed largely of nylon and Fortress themselves promote the use of mixed rodes - as part of their portfolio of product.

Interestingly, I know someone will contradict this - but I have never heard of a set Fortress of any size mentioned as dragging with the wind from the set direction. One hears of them dragging in a change of tide (maybe the anchor was too big) but never has there been mentioned that once set they drag. The usual comment is that Fortress are so difficult to retrieve (maybe too small :( ).

Fortress, I think quite rightly, make the point that a well set Fortress is immovable, should there be a change of tide - but setting a Fortress well might need an all chain rode? and or a slightly smaller anchor than that suggested (unless its blowing 50 knots :().

Sorry if this has drifted slightly from the OPs question. But I might tend to look at an anchor slightly smaller than might be normally suggested, it can then be used as a kedge and maybe if my random thoughts have any foundation - make an excellent primary.

The alternative, one that Fortress would strongly support, is buy a small Fortress as kedge and then hedge your bets and buy a bigger one in case of storm force winds, at the masthead :)

Jonathan
 
NormanS said:
I think I understood most of that, until you said "masthead" :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Call us whimps but when we get a storm forecast, or 50 knots, we go somewhere that offers a modicum of shelter, usually an anchorage :) We are subject to forecasts of 50 knots commonly in Tasmania, exceptionally (seldom) in Sydney. So it might be 50 knots 'outside' but not where we are and we measure our wind, at the masthead (not at a coastguard station on top of a hill :) - which is where much of Sydney's strong wind records seem to come from.

Jonathan
 
Update. I visited Force 4 in Bristol and decided that the FX-7 looks a bit too small while the FX-11 looks a bit too big. An FX-9 would be ideal, but doesn't exist. I am therefore postponing the decision. The anchors are cheaper online, anyway.

Many, many thanks for all the advice. I am sure I will get one, and I think it will be an FX-11. An extra thirty quid for a spare bower seems well worthwhile, and I can keep it dismantled, which solves the space problem. How do Fortress manage to charge £130 for a storage bag?
 
Last edited:
Many years ago, a boat that I had at the time, quietly dragged, and the first I knew of it was when the rudder was on the rock, and there was an underwater reef alongside. With the tide rapidly ebbing, before I could put the engine into gear, I had to get her head swung round away from the reef. By jumping into the dinghy with the kedge, and laying it out to port, I was able to get back aboard and by winching in the kedge line, swing the boat away from the reef. Using the engine, I was then able to get back into deep water, before it was too late.

The thing that I would certainly not have had time to do, would have been to put the various parts of an anchor together. I reckon for a kedge to be any good, it has to be ready for immediate use, preferably with rode attached.
 
I use an FX 37 , and as they are so light and easy to handle , I keep it in a locker and just whip it out
when anchoring . looks better in a locker and no sharpies on deck .
Size ~? Fortress recommend an FX 16 for my 11.7 m cat but it did look too small , the FX 37 is spec to a 52 ft 22 ton boat
and has held me steady in a few gales !
 
It would help if Fortress provided some means to make a precise paper (or card) model - and then we would know what size they are. Our chandlers here simply stock them in their boxes on the top shelves of the anchor section, well above eye height. Its impossible to guess size from a disassembled item in a cardboard box. Delivering them around the world in cardboard boxes must make sense - but why chandlers do not assemble suggests they are not really serious about marketing them.

Despite my ramblings - I would buy the bigger version (so for JumbleDuck the FX 11), the disadvantage of weight (when you go bigger) is not there with a Fortress, as grafozz says - even a F 37 is easily handleable. Going to the larger of the sizes offers the Fortress as a fall back to whatever the main anchor is (and I like the idea that one's anchors can all be primary anchors). The only disadvantage of going bigger is if you deploy and the tide changes and it self trips because it is not deeply set - if you are aware this might be an issue - you can plan accordingly. Interestingly - posts here suggest many use their Fortress as a second anchor in a 'V' (as we also do) - in which situation tide (or wind) change is obviously not an issue

But keeping a second anchor disassembled means you will probably never use it. So if you cannot store it assembled, I might rethink priorities (so that you can store it, assembled). They are very 'thin' and as long as the locker is large enough to take it a Fortress slides down one 'wall' quite easily and then takes up little room.

If we had to start an anchor armoury again - the Fortress would always be part of our choice (but I'd like 2, a big and small!)

Jonathan
 
Neeves said:
But keeping a second anchor disassembled means you will probably never use it.
Click to expand...

See post #10, I have a boat whose primary anchor is stowed disassembled :). And I've used it on several occasions.

Obviously it's very much preferable not to have to dismantle the second anchor if you can possibly avoid it, but doing so certainly doesn't mean you'll never use it. It really doesn't take long to put the five bits together after you've tried it a couple of times, especially if you replace the nuts and bolts with larger-headed knurled ones.

Pete
 
prv said:
See post #10, I have a boat whose primary anchor is stowed disassembled :). And I've used it on several occasions.

Obviously it's very much preferable not to have to dismantle the second anchor if you can possibly avoid it, but doing so certainly doesn't mean you'll never use it. It really doesn't take long to put the five bits together after you've tried it a couple of times, especially if you replace the nuts and bolts with larger-headed knurled ones.

Pete
Click to expand...

I was really agreeing with NormanS in #33 - especially as Loctite nuts become less 'tite' with constant assembly/disassembly and I'm not sure how many replace the nuts such they are totally reliable. To us anchors are a safety item and safety items should be immediately available. The Fortress is easy to assemble, dead easy - but I'd not like to do it at 2am in the rain with something nasty getting closer! If I were replacing the nuts and bolts - I'd also make them all the same size, so that you only need one spanner!

When we wonder if we might need to deploy a second anchor (and this is quite frequent as we would do it at about 30 knots - not because we need it at 30 knots but deployment is easier in 30 knots than 40!) we have the Fortress on the bow with its rode neatly coiled in a milk crate. But we are lucky to have plenty of storage and deck space. But storing an assembled Fortress somewhere on the transom, when you are 'cruising', is surely not that difficult (even if you store under a mattress when you are day sailing). With age they do not go grotty like a steel anchor and can be kept clean - so storage under a berth, might be uncomfortable :( (who uses all the berths all the time?, but will cause no deterioration of the mattress.

Jonathan

edit Most people instantly assume that the setting of a second anchor is to support the primary, which is partially true, but smaller yachts and catamarans are prone to veering at anchor and setting the second anchor reduces this wandering around the anchorage (in the same way a bridle reduces veering for a beamy mono or a cat). Vyv makes this point in his second post, he deployed his Fortress to make life a bit more comfortable. Many anchorages are sheltered but the wind shears all over the place - it might not be an issue for larger yachts - but its a big issue with smaller ones and cats - and if you need, or can, deploy a second anchor to control this movement - then the lightweight Fortress is ideal. So even if you carry a monster primary - deploying the second anchor can still be invaluable. close edit
 
Last edited:
Danforth style anchors were thought to have a large surface area. This was true in the days of old, but one the improvements of modern new generation anchors is a much larger surface area.

It does not help that some anchor manufacturers do not list the fluke area. It is also tough to compare aluminium and steel anchors. Which model do you use for a comparison?

I just measured a Fortress FX16 and got 738 square centimetres. Rocna list a 15kg model as having an area of 1030 square centimetres. So in say Vyv's case, his Rocna has a considerably larger fluke area than his Fortress (if my figures and Rocna's figures are accurate).

It would be great if we could get some surface area measurements from the multitude of anchors of anchors that don't list this statistic (and even from the anchor manufacturers that list the surface to check they have not erred).
 
OUr Fortress kedge iscurrently sored in a stern deck locker, basically unassembled but with short S/S chain and nylon rode attached. THere is a neat little pushpit/rail clamp gizmo available here that is around $40 and when we get around to it will fit one, it holds all Danforth/Fortress styles conveniently and a small folding crate box will hold the rode tidily nearby.

http://www.boatbandit.com/rail-moun...aZPsSWbNsD6tseA5ZqIAHeVoMi99Wt52vYaAqkJ8P8HAQ
 
Last edited:
I don't see how knowing the actual figure for surface area helps one little bit. Some anchors perform better than others in different seabeds. Much more useful to know what the seabed is, and whether it is clean, where you propose to anchor, and then use an appropriate type. However, for a kedge, which may very well have to be laid out by dinghy, the light weight, and proven good holding of a Fortress would be hard to beat.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top