Is a fortress Anchor just a sharper, better angled and alloy Danforth?

C

C08

Well-Known Member
Joined
8 Feb 2013
Messages
3,981
Visit site
The huge difference in performance - is it just better engineering on an old design concept?

How do these things reset in prctice at the turn of tide/wind?
 
The experience of users seems to vary enormously. Some, including me, would never use a Fortress as the bower anchor, having had it drag when the wind or tide changed direction. In a recent thread a number of equally experienced liveaboards said they would use nothing else. I will continue to use mine only as a kedge, where it is superb. I have never owned a Danforth, so cannot really comment, but only today I swam my Fortress ashore, with 8 metres of 8 mm chain, on a tiny kiddies inflatable dinghy. A Danforth would undoubtedly have sunk it.
 
They are both basically the same thing, but the shape/design of the flukes on the Fortress is quite different to the flukes on a Danforth and it has a longer stock.

My Danforth is 21Kg, my Fortress is 9Kg, both when I use them are on 10mm chain. Both work equally as well but the Fortress in my experience needs to lowered not dropped, otherwise the chain will hit the seabed first and the anchor sits on top of it!!! Get your head around that (using the right sized Fortress) and you have a good anchor that digs in and hold very well.
 
ahabdonal said:
The huge difference in performance - is it just better engineering on an old design concept?

How do these things reset in prctice at the turn of tide/wind?
Click to expand...

Huge difference in performance.

Anchor tests confirm what can be seen in real world. In the big 2006 test the west marine Danforth recorded a max of 1500 lb the Fortress held over 5000 lb (where the test was stopped)

Resetting ability is the weakness with both designs.
 
noelex said:
Huge difference in performance.

Anchor tests confirm what can be seen in real world. In the big 2006 test the west marine Danforth recorded a max of 1500 lb the Fortress held over 5000 lb (where the test was stopped)

Resetting ability is the weakness with both designs.
Click to expand...

I have heard that there was a cockup on the ordering front for that test. Apparently the Fortress was bought by weight, rather than an appropriate size to match the others. Its area was therefore disproportionately large. Not sure of the truth of this but I still have the test write-up at home, can check in a couple of weeks.

Found it http://content.westmarine.com/documents/pdfs/WestAdvisor/2006-Anchor-Tests.pdf. The Fortress was a FX37 whereas most of the steel anchors were 35 lb. My FX16 is supposedly equivalent to my 35 lb Delta. The FX37 weighs 22lb, so it is still impressive performance but not a direct comparison.
 
Last edited:
vyv_cox said:
I have heard that there was a cockup on the ordering front for that test. Apparently the Fortress was bought by weight, rather than an appropriate size to match the others. Its area was therefore disproportionately large. Not sure of the truth of this but I still have the test write-up at home, can check in a couple of weeks.
Click to expand...

I think that is a valid criticism. The FX-37 used was considerably larger (in area and suitable application) than the 26lb Danforth.
 
I have found that what can considerably improve the setting speed of a flat anchor (and possibly one of the causes of Fortress efficiency?) is to lengthen the stock (name? well the transverse bar at the back of the flukes) on its two sides.
The Fortress has a stock which appears considerably longer than some Danforth-like types.
I have a Foblight and it is definitely quicker in setting after having lentghened the two sides of the stock with two pieces of tubing.

Just talking about anchor setting first time, when first lowered, *not* at the turn of the tide where I personally use other anchors so I have not tested the long-stock flat one for re-setting :)
 
Well further to my other posts doubting the setting qualities of my new Fortress FX16. i have now successfully used it a few times now in pipe weed, it held but not overly well dug in ( the Bruce would not penetrate pipe weed). in mud this w/e the chain came bar tight, you could play a tune on it & i could not wind the anchorman windlass any further, i waited a few minutes & had a bit more chain in until the Fortress finally broke free bring up two large clumps on mud / clay. we always anchor over night with tide turning, so far so good i now get the anchor go down slowly when on the bottom i pay the chain out slowly & snub it to set the anchor, then pay out more chain.
the main advantage is the FX16 weight or the lack of weight, we do not stow the anchor over the roller, its always in the chain locker so bending over the bow to bring the anchor aboard, was a problem even with an undersized Bruce. I could never manage a 15 kg anchor due the weight / fine bows / large furling drum & narrow pulpit
 
Bear in mind this is only Greek experience, so no constant resets with tide.

I'm pretty certain that it's the sharpness that makes it work. I've used it a main bower, with another as a kedge in 30-40Kts without a problem. Like any type, there are places where it takes three goes to get it set, bunt never had to did out the CQR. Steve mentions swimming one ashore. I can beat that. We had an Ankarolina tape kedge warp. And a need to set a stern anchor. Just for a giggle, I swung it in the biggest fastest circle that I could manage, and let fly. Being useless at ball sports, the release was surprisingly good. But the best bit was that it 'flew' underwater, towing the tape with it. Held all night, and getting back up (manual windlass) brought an enormous ball of mud with it. If you saw the setting on Youtube, you would call 'edited'.

No anchor is best. I do like the Fortress though.

ps. About 500 nights at anchor in Greece. (to self, blimey a year and a half in Greece!).
 
ahabdonal said:
The huge difference in performance - is it just better engineering on an old design concept?

How do these things reset in prctice at the turn of tide/wind?
Click to expand...

The only problem I've had with a Fortress is after a good blow getting the s0dding thing out again! It doesn't matter whether it's at the opposite direction to which it was originally laid - once it's well in it's really in.
 
A key benefit of the Fortress is that it can be assembled with a wider angle between flukes and shank which makes it dig in more effectively in very soft mud. It really works and is often the only type of anchor that will hold in some Caribbean hurricane holes where the bottom is liquid mud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top