One anchor or two?

[BartW]

this seems serious Mike !

about the fuel consumption;
weight and length and engine is very similar like BA,
BA's consumption at 20kn is 15l/nm (almost identical as your specced consumption, 400l /hr / 27kn)
at 10kn BA uses 7l/nm


when having this boat, (perhaps with stabs) don't see any atraction anymore in a smaller trawler

and its a nice looking boat aswell. timeless, ...etc...

and when you navigate at 10kn,
you won't look pathetic (as with a big sports cruiser not on the plane)
and you're still faster then most trawlers, and sail boats

one's you're used to the size, there is no way back,
this is a real ship,
this is your luxury Med residence

good luck with it !



Re the ankers,
agree its more esthetics then usefull, (actually I also happen to like this)
accept they are just nice to have and to look at.
make sure that at least one of them is up for the job, (enough weight, enough chain length,...)
not at all a deal breaker


sorry to have spoken with your swmbo,
but there was a blink in your eyes aswell

 

[jfm]

Sorry JFM,

didn't notice the pic carefully enough, I was focusing on the lovely teak tbh
This size is completely outside my league and I saw quite a few "new" things in this pic
I also had in mind the bow pic of MM boat with the two massive identical anchors and hadn't realised that the norm is two different size ones. Would really like to see a bow pic now!

V.

When they are dreadnoughts, like MapisM's beautiful serious stuff, with the shanks going right up the hawspipes, they are usually same size. Possibly for aesthetic reasons!

 

[jfm]

when having this boat, (perhaps with stabs) don't see any atraction anymore in a smaller trawler

and its a nice looking boat aswell. timeless, ...etc...

and when you navigate at 10kn,
you won't look pathetic (as with a big sports cruiser not on the plane)
and you're still faster then most trawlers, and sail boats

one's you're used to the size, there is no way back,
this is a real ship,
this is your luxury Med residence

+1

 

[matm]

In truth, its my SWMBO who's keen to upgrade to something larger; I'm not sure I'm so keen

Blimey, world's first? Can our SWMBOs talk? Mine always needs some convincing

 

[photodog]

Not true. I'm looking at his article right now so thanks to Salty John and everyone else who has replied. I do read everything with interest even if I don't reply directly to every post

Ditto not true. I read his excellent article too, and in passing bought £60 of chandlery from his shop LOL! I thought it was an excellent article, particularly when he mentioned that when using 2 anchors in strong wind you must remember it might cost you not help you, if you need to get the hell out. That's a view I share strongly, and I thought it worth emphasising that on a post in case browsers dont click on his link

I shall graciously withdraw my odviously scurrilous accusation!

The one I would most like to master is the Bahamian... But i can just see myself getting totally bent out of shape and losing both hooks.... But it would have odvious uses here in places like Dartmouth...

 

[MapisM]

I also had in mind the bow pic of MM boat with the two massive identical anchors

LOL, is this what you're talking about?

I actually don't get the reasoning behind the two different anchor sizes.
For the very simple reason that 99.9% of the time there's no need for two anchors, to start with.
And in that 0.1% (loss of one anchor, plus other exceptional cases I'll mention in a minute), you want the second one to be as good as the first, and with the very same amount of chain. Nothing more, nothing less.
I've now had the above ground tackle (100lbs anchors+100m chain each side) for a dozen of years, and I wouldn't need all the fingers of one hand to count the number of times when I've used both hooks together.
And btw, that setup is by far the most convenient to use (pocket anchors, vs. the more common anchor rollers arrangement), so the reason for not using them has nothing to see with being a nuisance - it's just plain useless.
In the very few cases when I used both anchors at the same time, I was either in a marina where there was still some space for mooring stern to, but no free bow lines left (ACI Split), or moored in a bay where I brought stern lines ashore (also in Croatia).
And in both cases, I wouldn't have used such technique if I couldn't have been 100% sure to stay there in ANY sort of weather.
No matter how efficient the hardware is, recovering two deployed big anchors with the boat jumping on waves is not something I would fancy.
Been there done that with one anchor, and that was more than enough.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

I actually don't get the reasoning behind the two different anchor sizes.
For the very simple reason that 99.9% of the time there's no need for two anchors, to start with.

Well that makes the very big assumption that one anchor is of sufficient size to hold the boat. I know from previous experience that Ferretti are just as bad as other mobo manufacturers for undersizing their anchors. I have upgraded the anchors on both Ferrettis I've owned so far. Its a pure guess but maybe somebody in Ferretti calculated that a 68 footer needs a 50kg anchor but since they were fitting 2 anchors, they could just use 2 x 25kg ones. Now a 25kg anchor is no way big enough to hold a 68 footer in 99.9% of anchoring situations. So assuming that Ferretti have done something like that, one of the first things I will do is replace one of the existing (Bruce) anchors with a 60kg Delta assuming it fits. In fact there's no reason not to upgrade both. Throw both of those in the water and I'll never have to moor in a marina again

 

[MapisM]

when having this boat, (perhaps with stabs) don't see any atraction anymore in a smaller trawler

and its a nice looking boat aswell. timeless, ...etc...

and when you navigate at 10kn,
you won't look pathetic (as with a big sports cruiser not on the plane)
and you're still faster then most trawlers, and sail boats

one's you're used to the size, there is no way back,
this is a real ship,
this is your luxury Med residence

+1

Oi, gin palace folks, don't get me started on the endless differences with proper boats!
How many of you have got TWO 100% watertight BOW sections like in the first two pics below?
And what about the commercial grade propulsion in the last pic?
...just to name one example from my last visit to one of the very few builders who still make some decent stuff!
(hint: it's in the good old US of A, with apologies for the phone quality pics).

 

[MapisM]

Well that makes the very big assumption that one anchor is of sufficient size to hold the boat. I know from previous experience that Ferretti are just as bad as other mobo manufacturers for undersizing their anchors. I have upgraded the anchors on both Ferrettis I've owned so far. Its a pure guess but maybe somebody in Ferretti calculated that a 68 footer needs a 50kg anchor but since they were fitting 2 anchors, they could just use 2 x 25kg ones. Now a 25kg anchor is no way big enough to hold a 68 footer in 99.9% of anchoring situations. So assuming that Ferretti have done something like that, one of the first things I will do is replace one of the existing (Bruce) anchors with a 60kg Delta assuming it fits. In fact there's no reason not to upgrade both. Throw both of those in the water and I'll never have to moor in a marina again

All agreed, BUT:
1) don't take it for granted that much bigger anchors will fit with the bow rollers arrangement;
2) don't assume that you'd be safer just by deploying both, unless you can secure the boat astern (as in my previous examples). If the boat can swing around, that's a recipe for a proper mess.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

All agreed, BUT:
1) don't take it for granted that much bigger anchors will fit with the bow rollers arrangement;
2) don't assume that you'd be safer just by deploying both, unless you can secure the boat astern (as in my previous examples). If the boat can swing around, that's a recipe for a proper mess.

No I was just joking a little. Anchoring with lines ashore in Croatia, of course, what everyone fears is the Bora and I would feel safer in a Bora with both big anchors out rather than one and the usual 4 lines ashore. If I was swinging to the wind, then I would almost certainly not set both anchors, just the one.
Regarding the bow rollers, on my 53 I had the bow roller modified to suit a 40kg Delta and it wasn't a major job so I would hope it wouldn't be a huge job on the 68, if I wanted to do it

 

[BartW]

Its a pure guess but maybe somebody in Ferretti calculated that a 68 footer needs a 50kg anchor but since they were fitting 2 anchors, they could just use 2 x 25kg ones. Now a 25kg anchor is no way big enough to hold a 68 footer in 99.9% of anchoring situations. So assuming that Ferretti have done something like that, one of the first things I will do is replace one of the existing (Bruce) anchors with a 60kg Delta assuming it fits. In fact there's no reason not to upgrade both. Throw both of those in the water and I'll never have to moor in a marina again

why do you guess / take that conclusion so quickly that the anchor's are not big enough ?
during the 12y of her live span, the previous owner might have had several situations where he needed a good anchor for holding the boat ?
and he might have preferred to deploy one instead of two anchors, as most of us on here

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

why do you guess / take that conclusion so quickly that the anchor's are not big enough ?

Because, through experience, I've found that there are 2 things that Ferretti do badly, helm seats and anchors Of course, you're right. I'm not doing anything until I see what the situation is but I can tell straightaway that both anchors are Bruce type, as normally fitted by Ferretti. I don't like Bruce anchors in the Med because they don't penetrate weed on the seabed as well as other types of anchor like a Delta so I can say straightaway that at least one of those Bruce anchors is history

 

[benjenbav]

It might be quite a good idea if the existing anchors are each large enough, to keep one Bruce and replace the other Bruce with a Delta (or whatever) to have a choice to suit your bottom (so to speak).

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

It might be quite a good idea if the existing anchors are each large enough, to keep one Bruce and replace the other Bruce with a Delta (or whatever) to have a choice to suit your bottom (so to speak).

Yes exactly what I was thinking because the Bruce works well in mud such as found in the northern Adriatic

 

[BartW]

Oi, gin palace folks, don't get me started on the endless differences with proper boats!
How many of you have got TWO 100% watertight BOW sections like in the first two pics below?
And what about the commercial grade propulsion in the last pic?
...just to name one example from my last visit to one of the very few builders who still make some decent stuff!

MapisM,
these proper boats are like the twin ankers,
very nice to have and to look at, but of no real practical use

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

ENGINES: 2 MAN x 1183hp
FUEL TYPE: Diesel
FUEL CAPACITY 4000 lt
FUEL CONSUMPTION: 400 lt/h
CRUISE SPEED: 27 Knots
MAX SPEED: 34 Knots
GENERATORS: 2 KOHLER 19kw & 11kw)
BEAM: 18.48 ft
DRAFT: 5.64 ft
WATER CAPACITY: 1000lt

.... believe the above consumption relates to 27 knot cruise, so that is 3.3 G/NM ... or about 0.31 NM/G

So assuming that drag is reduced a bit at 20 knots, but hull efficiency is similar, 0.4 may be a tad optimistic ... as may the other Feretti 68's out there that claim betwee 250 - 400L/hr

Nice boats though!!

Alf thanks for that. Where did those fuel consumption figures come from?

 

[jfm]

Oi, gin palace folks, don't get me started on the endless differences with proper boats!

Hey MapisM, I'm loving the really neat grey cabling in your second pic.

 

[MapisM]

Hey MapisM, I'm loving the really neat grey cabling in your second pic.

Yeah, yeah... Otoh, that beast has more or less the same LOA as your new ship, but with three times the full load displacement.
And the whole w/t compartment in that pic (which is BELOW the bow cabins, if you see what I mean) implies that it can go aground up to half of its lenght, get flooded, and still stay afloat, with all the technical equipment still working - bow thruster aside, possibly.
Now, I agree that this is not a daily occurrence for most of us fair weather boaters, but that thing is built to cross each and every stretches of water known to mankind in total safety...
...which in turn means that for Med cruising, THAT is indeed comparable to a waterfront villa in terms of comfort, stability, etc.!

 

[MapisM]

NRegarding the bow rollers, on my 53 I had the bow roller modified to suit a 40kg Delta and it wasn't a major job so I would hope it wouldn't be a huge job on the 68, if I wanted to do it

I see what you mean, but you didn't have two anchors.
Bow roller is fine for one hook, but it does restrict the choices quite a bit, with two of them.
In nothing else, one big anchor means that you must release a bit of it also whenever you just want to deploy the second one, which is a bit of a nuisance.
To be checked case by case, anyway.
The F68 is indeed a great boat anyway, go for her, you know you want to.

 

[Divemaster1]

Alf thanks for that. Where did those fuel consumption figures come from?

A quick Google for - Feretti 68 + fuel consumption

... one of them is http://www.exadasyachts.com/en/product_categories/19/products/71-motor-yacht-serene-ferretti-68

another showing 350 is http://www.yachting-greece.com/Moto...LEXANDROS_Ferretti_68_Motor_Yacht_Greece.html