how good is a fisherman anchor?

[trouville]

Normally i use a danfoorth with a large cqr as second.
Hear in the baltic ive been useing a fisherman and bruce,and was told by another British boat that their cqr hadent held!and they had begun to use a bruce
Anchoring in weed or hard clay my bruce held very well but not in weed
Now my fisherman seems to get throughweed and int the mud but yrsterday when the wind did a 180 i was afraid my chain or line may have turned around the fluke sticking up.!
Has anyone experience so far in soft mud i draged very very slowly and in weed once in it seems to stay but could it break out?if so would it reset as the bruce cqr would?
Its a 30ibs so does have some weight
Tomorrow more thunder is expected and through the weekend which means the wind can change and blow! im well in? to thick grey mud just now but surounded by very thick weed which meens its a sail in area only as the weed is very strong and up to and on the surface but looks very good!
Ahy advise about useing a fisherman with 2fathoms chain and 10 rope

 

[ccscott49]

The fisherman is excellent in weed and rock, the danger you mention of the chain wrapping round the up fluke is real, but it doesn't often happen if the swing is slow and the anchor has time to turn. It is also a problem with another great weed/ hard sand anchor, the northill. One way is to have a heavy length off chain, about 10 meters, from the anchor to the normal chain, this helps to keep the chain on the bottom and drag the anchor round. IMHO

 

[hylass]

how good is a fisherman anchor? (PBO)

The Fisherman anchor is THE most wonderful anchor.. to decorate your back yard.. :0)

I don’t know why people are continuing to say that the Fisherman is excellent in weed and rock?? There is absolutely no proof of that, it is only one of these old behaviour that I will call “pontoon gossip”..

In Rock, any lump of metal wedged between two rocks will held like hell.. but is sometime difficult to retrieve..

I was once on a big motor boat in the St Malo bay, with the team of the French magazine “Voiles magazine” doing anchor tests.. The journalist, an old salt with a long experience, suggested to go to a place full of weed (zostere) and we had onboard a large choice of different anchors, including a heavy (20 kg) grapnel and a Fisherman of about the same size.. and as I was asking why we took such pieces of museum, the journalist said that it was the only anchors which work in weed!..

After several attempts neither the grapnel, nor the Fisherman penetrate and hold.. then I suggested to try one of the “new technology” anchor we had onboard.. the journalist didn’t agree saying that if neither the firsherman nor the grapnel hold, no anchor will hold.. But as I insisted, he finally tried one of these “new technology” which penetrate and hold at the first attempt..

Some people also says that if you want the Fisherman to hold enough, you have to oversize it!!! But if you take any of these “new technology anchor” for a much lighter weight they will hold more than the oversized Fisherman anchor and if you compare them weight for weight the “new technology” ones will overcome by far the holding of the Fisherman.. without the risk of the chain wrapping around..

The Northill?? Very similar to the Fisherman I think?

Now the question?? What to use in the very specific ground of the Baltic? Have a look at the story of Morgan’s Cloud.. (www.morganscloud.com) and look what is their experie

 

[trouville]

well in the med or west coast france i agree but hear in the baltic it holds!
today there was a rotten blow the anchor had turned180 and hasent moved draged that is a bit.
in another anchorage with thin mud sand it draged so slowly in f5 i went to sleep next morning after a sleep in as it was frezing being only the behining july i got up made tea then moved
with my bruce 15kg when that broke out i hzd the sail up in record time without tea!
the bruce holds but when it breaks out you have to be quick
ive wanted to change the fisherman which came with the boat in 1944 but it works well hear and its /was like new as it lived under a bearth where the boat yard put it on launch
so modern tech or old the fishermans the anchor for weed hear if not france!

 

[ccscott49]

Yep thats a northill, but a bit flimsy that one! But come on, you are an expensive anchor inventor/manufacturer/seller you would rubbish any other anchor. In my experience, not "pontoon gossip" the fisherman is a good weed/rock anchor. That's not in question ask a few people that use them in certain conditions and the northill is used almost exclusively on the west coast Canada by professional fishermen etc. So basically I dont give a stuff what you say. Sorry, but you have your own agenda.

 

[Guest]

Make that 2 .....

Having dropped a good few fishermans and grapnels in rocky / weedy areas - I can say that any other anchor with wider flukes / more compact or less 'spike' will hold less.

Common sense, physical laws indicate a 'spike' is needed to hold in such conditions.

Hylas has been rumbled many moons ago and also many have tried to educate - but Hylas still preaches rope rodes, chums are useless, his own anchor is best, that scientific tests carried out prove him right and everyone else wrong .... sorry but a tractor, a beach and/or a french mobo are no proof in the world of nature. Scores have verified the action / use of traditional accepted methods and STILL Hylas flies in the face of experience.....

Trouville here has demonstrated quite vividly about his holding on his 1944 fishermans - Hylas will either stay quiet - having no words to argue with, or come back rubbishing it ....

Hi Trouville - we've had some good contacts and if thats what you found happened then good luck. I for one believe you.

On the river where I live ..... we mostly home made anchors ..... funny thing is they are based on 'bent-hooks' welded together so as to form a 3 way or 4 way star ... the shank is often padded out with further welded on metal .... so imagine a curved fluke grapnel with a bulky shank .... they hold like there's no tomorrow .... now if they didn't - I'm sure some bright spark would have come up with a design more suited over the years ....... the guys over here literally live for fishing - spending hours out there ..... I would believe them first before a suspect short term trial.

I carry a fishermans out here and also as a spare on my UK boat .... my main in UK being the heaviest Plough I can carry. Never had a bad moment with them .... but of course I also use all chain on Plough and a chain to rope on fishermans...... the fishermans set-up as a lunch hook really.

/forums/images/graemlins/cool.gif

 

[ccscott49]

Re: Make that 2 .....

Thanks Nigel, he does go on doesn't he! Now theres another post by ghost across the way also about fishhermans, obviously a student of the hylas school of anchoring.

 

[hylass]

Re: Make that 2 .....

[ QUOTE ]
so modern tech or old the fishermans the anchor for weed here if not France!

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi Trouville..

Did you have a look at the Morgan’s cloud Web page (www.morganscloud.com) (one more from the “hylas school of anchoring”.:0))

There you can learn some “practical experience” from somebody sailinin the same area than you, with a “modern technology” anchor..


[ QUOTE ]
ccscott49: “the Northill is used almost exclusively on the west coast Canada by professional fishermen”

[/ QUOTE ]


No luck ccscott49, this photo has not been taken on Canada West coast, but in Brazil.. – Bay of Parati - (So basically I don’t give a stuff what you say. :0) )

[ QUOTE ]
“the fisherman is a good weed/rock anchor.”

[/ QUOTE ]


Just again a "pontoon gossip" could you tell me exactly what is your experience COMPARING Fisherman anchors to any “new technology” anchor??

On the July 2001 (Independent) Anchor tests have been done by the French sailing magazine “ Voiles magazine” they wrote.. (translated from French)

It is well known, by principle, the only anchors which are susceptible to hold on weed are the Fisherman and the Grapnel. To check it, we went to a weedy place (Zostères) with a Fisherman and a Grapnel.

The folding Fisherman is nice and looks like models used by our ancestors.
Unfortunately, the results we have obtained have been mediocre and non significant. Don’t bother.. we have tried our 12 kg Grapnel in the same conditions.. with as bad results..

Due to this deceptive experience, we have tried two non hinged anchors with a ballasted tip: the 16 kg SPADE and the 16 kg Brake. These two anchors have had the same behaviour than in previous grounds: Immediate setting and an holding without dragging from 500 to 600 kg with peaks up to 1000 kg..

Conclusion: on a weedy bottom a “new generation” anchor give good results. Its ballasted tip can rapidly penetrate the sea bottom under the weed…
(again one more from the “hylas school of anchoring”.:0))

Now, if you have any DOCUMENTED comparative study (no again a "pontoon gossip") saying something different, I will be pleased to change my mind on this subject..

Now, about rocks!!.. On flat surface rocks.. neither the fisherman, nor any other anchor will hold!.
On “boulders” any lump of steel, wedged between two rocks will hold.. and most of the time, this is the chain itself, wedged somewhere which hold.. difficult then to make any comparison..

But please forget about Biblos anchors, Gorgone anchors or Fisherman anchors.. Keep them for your museum..

Yes, I’m an anchor inventor/manufacturer/seller.. but to be an anchor inventor, you should have studied all existing anchors, you should have tested them.. you would also have participated at numerous anchor tests.. and also as a full time living aboard since 13 years now.. I have “some” experience of practical anchoring too..

Not only I have conducted my own tests, comparing the Fisherman to other anchors, but also I’ve been assisting to many independent tests..

Therefore my DOCUMENTED experience about the Fisherman anchor is negative.. Weight for weight, its results are by far exceeded by new technology anchors..

[ QUOTE ]
nigel_luther: - Hylas has been rumbled many moons ago and also many have tried to educate - but Hylas still preaches rope rodes, chums are useless, his own anchor is best, that scientific tests carried out prove him right and everyone else wrong .... sorry but a tractor, a beach and/or a french mobo are no proof in the world of nature. Scores have verified the action / use of traditional accepted methods and STILL Hylas flies in the face of experience.....


[/ QUOTE ]

Oh No Nigel, I’ve been “rumbled” for more than ten years now.. But I’m very pleased to note that they are more and more students in my school of anchoring!.. :0)

Yes, it tooks about ten years to convince people that the anchor holding was not related to the anchor weight, but more to the surface area and the shape of the anchor blade..
But you can say what you want.. I perfectly know that they are some conservative people that I will never convince..
I know also that it tooks some time to convince people that the world was not a flat disk but a sphere… and that the Sun was not turning around the Earth.. it doesn’t matter, as I know that I don’t have any risk to be burned for having different theories about anchors and anchoring.. :0)

Yes I still preaches that rope is better than chain, that Chums are peanuts and tandem anchors are inefficient, that most anchor connectors are not strong enough and NEVER use “C” links to connect chains.. and doing that, I don’t have any commercial interest..
No, I NEVER said that my anchor is the best.. I simply repeat what all tests around the world say, tests performed by independent magazines and in real situation (not as you wrongly say: from a tractor, a beach and/or a french mobo ) and also comments from USERS..

[ QUOTE ]
“Hylas flies in the face of experience.....”

[/ QUOTE ]

We can talk about “experience” What is YOUR?? Then I will talk about mine..

Just talking about experience.. it is very easy to criticise a product that you have never tested!.. Just to help increase your own experience, this is a copy of a post written today on the “Hylas boat owners forum” (Whaoooo some more students from my school of anchoring)

“Thanks to those that have thus far shared their experiences with the SPADE, I think this is a first - no negative comments - on a suggested primary anchor choice
Finally Kudos to Alain Poiraud who apparently not only built his own boat, but failing to find a satisfactory anchor for it, went ahead and designed and built an anchor too for the benefit of us all! Alan Teed”

Fortunately for me there is not only “conservative people”… but also open minded people who have some “experience” and can talk about it.. :0)

[ QUOTE ]
“in rocky / weedy areas - Common sense, physical laws indicate a 'spike' is needed to hold in such conditions.”

[/ QUOTE ]

Well Nigel.. your are on the good way to accept the theories of the Hylas school of anchoring.. Yes you’re right, a “spike” is needed, but not only a spike, but also a spike with the right penetrating angle, and as much weight as possible to help penetration.. But with all your experience, do you mean that there is only the Fisherman which has a “spike”??


[ QUOTE ]
“Trouville here has demonstrated quite vividly about his holding on his 1944 fishermans - Hylas will either stay quiet - having no words to argue with,”

[/ QUOTE ]


Trouville has demonstrated nothing.. I don’t have any experience of the Baltic Sea.. as by choice, I prefer the warm waters.. but you can learn from the experience of very well known sailors: John Harries and Phyllis Nickel. who are sailing “Morgan’s Cloud” in HIGH LATITUDES and who say:

We think this anchor is the next best thing to sliced bread! It sets immediately and holds in almost any bottom, INCLUDING THICK KELP. We like the SPADE so much, we now have a 120lb as our bower anchor and a 66lb as our secondary anchor.
http://www.morganscloud.com/stuff/deck.htm

[ QUOTE ]
“On the river where I live ..... we mostly home made anchors ..... 'bent-hooks' welded together so as to form a 3 way or 4 way star - the guys over here literally live for fishing - spending hours out there ..... I would believe them first before a suspect short term trial.”

[/ QUOTE ]


Waoooo !!What an experience!!! I understand now why we have a different opinion.. I didn’ t know I was talking with a “river” sailor!!!.. But I will still believe my own “short term trial” anchor.. :0)

[ QUOTE ]
“I also use a chain to rope on fishermans...... the fishermans set-up as a lunch hook really”

[/ QUOTE ]


Well, better and better.. I’m pleased to note that I have convinced you about the advantages of the “chain to rope” anchoring rode.. you are making progress.. :0)

Now, will you “either stay quiet - having no words to argue with, or come back rubbishing it” ....?? :0)

(Sorry for the delay answering posts.. I’m not in an office, but only going from cyber cafe to cyber café. I don’t have ADSL and I’m not 24 hours/24 Internet connected)

 

[TNLI]

The traditional admiralty pattern fishermens anchor is still used by RNLI boats for rock or wreck use. The other option is to use a grapnel, but not seen any test results comparing the 2.

 

[Boathook]

Nearly 17 year old thread. Why resurrect it ?

 

[thinwater]

how good is a fisherman anchor? (PBO)

The Fisherman anchor is THE most wonderful anchor.. to decorate your back yard.. :0)

I don’t know why people are continuing to say that the Fisherman is excellent in weed and rock?? There is absolutely no proof of that, it is only one of these old behaviour that I will call “pontoon gossip”..

In Rock, any lump of metal wedged between two rocks will held like hell.. but is sometime difficult to retrieve..

I was once on a big motor boat in the St Malo bay, with the team of the French magazine “Voiles magazine” doing anchor tests.. The journalist, an old salt with a long experience, suggested to go to a place full of weed (zostere) and we had onboard a large choice of different anchors, including a heavy (20 kg) grapnel and a Fisherman of about the same size.. and as I was asking why we took such pieces of museum, the journalist said that it was the only anchors which work in weed!..

After several attempts neither the grapnel, nor the Fisherman penetrate and hold.. then I suggested to try one of the “new technology” anchor we had onboard.. the journalist didn’t agree saying that if neither the firsherman nor the grapnel hold, no anchor will hold.. But as I insisted, he finally tried one of these “new technology” which penetrate and hold at the first attempt..

Some people also says that if you want the Fisherman to hold enough, you have to oversize it!!! But if you take any of these “new technology anchor” for a much lighter weight they will hold more than the oversized Fisherman anchor and if you compare them weight for weight the “new technology” ones will overcome by far the holding of the Fisherman.. without the risk of the chain wrapping around..

The Northill?? Very similar to the Fisherman I think?

Now the question?? What to use in the very specific ground of the Baltic? Have a look at the story of Morgan’s Cloud.. (www.morganscloud.com) and look what is their experie

That is not a Northill, that is a home-made, modified copy based only on the general idea.

This is a Northill. Genuine Northills are uncommon outside the US. They have the same fluke-fouling vulnerability as a fisherman, but MUCH greater holding power in sand and mud. They are quite good in weed and rocks. They are what a fisherman could be and make the fisherman design quite obsolete in every application., since they have the same advantages with better holding in sand and mud. But I don't think the slightly improved rock and weed holding is enough to every really recommen them over a good modern anchor. I've used and tested them side-by-side with modern anchors.

 

[TNLI]

I must copy the post above and show it to the RNLI design office chaps in Poole, the HQ for the RNLI, offshore production and training facility. They insist that an admiralty pattern fishermand be fitted or carried by all the offshore lifeboats. The inshore RIBs just carry a Lewmar Delta, as their only anchors. The offshorboats also carry a yellow peril spade, but new ones will get the Lewmar CQR due to them repeating some tests done and finding out they were valid results.
Anchoring in heavy weed or rocks always produces very unlreiable iffy results. Most boaters that can read an admiratly chart chose approved anchorages or areas marked as having a sand or mud bottom. When anchoring in weed if you really have to, don't forget that the depth sounder signals reflect off the top of the weed layer if it's thick enough, so add several meters to the depth shown when calculating the required scope. Huge difference if it's a kelp bed.
Even our good Lord him or herself likes a fishermans anchor.

PS: I'm guilty of resurecting old threads on occasions cos all thread should be allowed time to mature before being dug up again.

 

[Neeves]

I must copy the post above and show it to the RNLI design office chaps in Poole, the HQ for the RNLI, offshore production and training facility. They insist that an admiralty pattern fishermand be fitted or carried by all the offshore lifeboats. The inshore RIBs just carry a Lewmar Delta, as their only anchors. The offshorboats also carry a yellow peril spade, but new ones will get the Lewmar CQR due to them repeating some tests done and finding out they were valid results.
Anchoring in heavy weed or rocks always produces very unlreiable iffy results. Most boaters that can read an admiratly chart chose approved anchorages or areas marked as having a sand or mud bottom. When anchoring in weed if you really have to, don't forget that the depth sounder signals reflect off the top of the weed layer if it's thick enough, so add several meters to the depth shown when calculating the required scope. Huge difference if it's a kelp bed.
Even our good Lord him or herself likes a fishermans anchor.

PS: I'm guilty of resurecting old threads on occasions cos all thread should be allowed time to mature before being dug up again.

Your credibility needs some support.

Would you please confirm that the RNLI are going to cease equipping their Shannon Class with Spade anchors and replace them with the 90 year old design of the CQR. As you have obviously received this information from RNLI (?) (or is it a figment of your imagination) I am sure you asked your contact precisely why if the CQR is so good they equipped their previous generation of boats with Deltas (and not CQRs) and why they are using Deltas on the inshore boats (instead of the implied better anchors - the CQR).

I would also need to ask - if the Spade anchors have been found wanting, then again I am sure you asked, why not remove the Spade anchors completely - makes no sense at all for them, a safety organisation, to use questionable anchors when you are claiming they think the CQR is better. If I were a crew man on the Shannon Class I would be concerned at carrying an anchor when the organisation itself had found a better product. The legal implications don't look good.

It is impossible to buy a new genuine CQR but second hand, genuine, versions are cheaply available at boat jumbles - but you cannot give them away.

Jonathan

 

[TNLI]

Your credibility needs some support.

Would you please confirm that the RNLI are going to cease equipping their Shannon Class with Spade anchors and replace them with the 90 year old design of the CQR. As you have obviously received this information from RNLI (?) (or is it a figment of your imagination) I am sure you asked your contact precisely why if the CQR is so good they equipped their previous generation of boats with Deltas (and not CQRs) and why they are using Deltas on the inshore boats (instead of the implied better anchors - the CQR).

I would also need to ask - if the Spade anchors have been found wanting, then again I am sure you asked, why not remove the Spade anchors completely - makes no sense at all for them, a safety organisation, to use questionable anchors when you are claiming they think the CQR is better. If I were a crew man on the Shannon Class I would be concerned at carrying an anchor when the organisation itself had found a better product. The legal implications don't look good.

It is impossible to buy a new genuine CQR but second hand, genuine, versions are cheaply available at boat jumbles - but you cannot give them away.

Jonathan

They are not replacing the spades, it's the Lewmar Delta in the RIB's that is being replaced with a Lewmar CQR for new builds. The fishermans is only on the offshore boats. No real room for a second anchor in a RIB.

The Lewmar CQR is not a 90 year old design, as if you look at the pictures from their site, the hinge has been modified, the trip eye is in a slightly different location.

 

[Neeves]

They are not replacing the spades, it's the Lewmar Delta in the RIB's that is being replaced with a Lewmar CQR for new builds. The fishermans is only on the offshore boats. No real room for a second anchor in a RIB.

Get you 'facts' straight

you said

" The offshorboats also carry a yellow peril spade, but new ones will get the Lewmar CQR due to them repeating some tests done and finding out they were valid results."

Please explain why a 30 year old design, Delta, is being replaced with a 90 year old design, CQR?

Maybe you need a spade to dig a bigger hole?

Jonathan

 

[TNLI]

Get you 'facts' straight

you said

" The offshorboats also carry a yellow peril spade, but new ones will get the Lewmar CQR due to them repeating some tests done and finding out they were valid results."

Please explain why a 30 year old design, Delta, is being replaced with a 90 year old design, CQR?

Maybe you need a spade to dig a bigger hole?

Jonathan

They are only talking about that replacement in terms of standardising parts, but I don't think it will happen for ages as all of the parts for the next 20 plus offshore boats have already been reserved in contract terms. Luckily Lewmar were not concerned about any oders for their Deltas that failed to perform as well in tests as the genuine out of production classic CQR. No idea why they changed the hinge side section. New Lewmar picture below.

 

[Neeves]

They are only talking about that replacement in terms of standardising parts, but I don't think it will happen for ages as all of the parts for the next 20 plus offshore boats has already been reserved in contract terms. Luckily Lewmar were not concerned about any oders for their Deltas that failed to perform as well in tests as the genuine out of production classic CQR. No idea why they changed the hinge side section. New Lewmar picture below.

That's not what you said

I quote

' but new ones will get the Lewmar CQR due to them repeating some tests done and finding out they were valid results.'

So basically you are saying your posts are simply not worth reading, you don't even know what you posted, and you are really a complete waste of space.

The question is do you make these things up or simply and intentionally - lie.

Jonathan

 

[TNLI]

They are only talking about that replacement in terms of standardising parts, but I don't think it will happen for ages as all of the parts for the next 20 plus offshore boats have already been reserved in contract terms. Luckily Lewmar were not concerned about any oders for their Deltas that failed to perform as well in tests as the genuine out of production classic CQR. No idea why they changed the hinge side section. New Lewmar picture below.

Just to correct one minor point, the RNLI were testing the new Lewmar CQR which is a bit more than a tad different to the original one, as the actual plough shape is not the same. So now what I want to know is how the OEM classic genuine CQR like wot I ave got, performs against the born again new generation Lewmar CQR. The classic was better than their old Delta, but I'm sure they changed the shape for good reasons.
Back to the OP's subject, cant's seem to find any tests of fishermans anchors in stones or heavy weed.

 

[Fr J Hackett]

What all you Johnny come lately's are missing is it was a post by Trouville, you should research some of his other more entertaining posts.

 

[Tranona]

Just to correct one minor point, the RNLI were testing the new Lewmar CQR which is a bit more than a tad different to the original one, as the actual plough shape is not the same. So now what I want to know is how the OEM classic genuine CQR like wot I ave got, performs against the born again new generation Lewmar CQR. The classic was better than their old Delta, but I'm sure they changed the shape for good reasons.
Back to the OP's subject, cant's seem to find any tests of fishermans anchors in stones or heavy weed.

Yes, this "new" CQR is very different fom the old one both in design and construction.

Do not understand how you can say the old one was better than the Delta when the YM test you linked to in the other thread shows exactly the opposite - the "genuine" CQR (which you are hoping to sell!) came bottom by a long way in the comparative tests and the Delta was in the middle - superior on every scenario.

You really do seem to have difficulty in sorting out fact from fiction and getting facts right.