Sea Anchor Vs Drogue?

ParaHandy

Active member
Joined
18 Nov 2001
Messages
5,210
Visit site
Sometime ago I got caught in a F8-9 off Portland and the horrors of that day are indelibly seered into the eyeballs - as they say. Now the owner of a long keel heavy displacement 35 footer (swmbo likes something solid under her) I expect some time or other to get into the nasty stuff and the question is what to do.

There has been some discussion previously on this matter here and I liked the advice to “buy a storm jib” before spending serious money hanging miles of rope out the back/bow. This isn’t entirely satisfactory though for a number of reasons.

The crew might be the most important factor in this and that’s likely to be the two of us. Whilst fit we’re getting close to the point when the kids start measuring us up for the old folks home. With that in mind, I read the Dashew book, skimmed the Pardey effort, and read many other anecdotal accounts. These experts disagree at the most fundamental level which leaves me none the wiser. Both agree that is the sea state that is the killer, not wind strength but that is sucking eggs (is that where the yanks got “it sucks” from?)

The most telling technical criticism of a sea anchor is Dashew’s. In his opinion, keeping the bows to the wind will sooner or later expose the yacht to a beam sea likely to roll her. The 30% expansion and contraction of a nylon rope over 100mtrs would seem to guarantee this happening and the friction heat generated may well cause the rope to split. The damage to a rudder when “sprung” backwards is an obvious factor. All assumes that the rope length has the anchor at an integer number of wave periods. The recommendation of a rope manufacturer was 24mm against the manufacturers 18mm which presents unwanted storage problems. Launching a sea anchor shouldn’t be a problem but it can easily be seen that getting it back in, particularly if the anchor sinks, will be extremely difficult. These anti- arguments are compelling. Most of Dashew’s correspondents describe the use of such a device as suicidal. The Pardeys suggest otherwise. They have a bridle strung from stern and bow (of their long keeled yacht although I doubt the keel type to be relevant in this instance) which allows her to be angled into the sea and off the wind. It is the use of this bridle which makes the device so advantageous for catamarans. There is a likely need to constantly adjust the angle and a continuous need to ensure that the rope does not chaff.

On the other hand, not a bad word has been said about the series drogue. The USCG eulogised about it. It is somewhat easier to recover. However, running before a storm requires someone to steer the damn thing continuously and I doubt we would have the stamina. Furthermore, long keelers aren’t renown for turning on a 6p and would be a handful.

In conclusion: given the crew and boat, a sea anchor might be the better bet? We can tuck up down below with our ovaltine while the elements rage etc etc. Would anybody agree, disagree?

Jus' sublime
 

BarryD

New member
Joined
10 Sep 2001
Messages
1,388
Location
Bathtub
Visit site
Not a lot of experieince but sleeping through the storm might be a mistake - why not run with it or try and get out of its way? If its really bad can you not move to an inner harbour?
 

ParaHandy

Active member
Joined
18 Nov 2001
Messages
5,210
Visit site
Ah! that's the huge advantage you have got - you've the power and speed to get out of the way. A point forcibly remarked upon by her good self. A rag & stick can't and it's 3 cylinder chuffing engine is not much help.

From your own recent experience you will know that any kind of sleep is not really likely. Too much noise for one.

If you did run before a storm (with a planing hull) do you have that much control to prevent her bow being swept round (broaching is the raggey term) on the wave in front of you?
 
G

Guest

Guest
No practical experience, but read lots of books. So for what its worth,
If you have the sea room run before the sea, use a drogue if needed to stop you accelerating out of control down the face of the waves.

No sea room, use a sea anchor. However, ensure that you prepare it well in advance, do everything possible to aoid chafe and be prepared for a really uncomfortable ride.

From the accounts I have read, people end up trying every option possible including pumping oil through the heads and hopefuly come through unscathed,

So I guess the final answer would be both.

CHL

Ps Rough Weather Sailing was the best read.
 

BrianJ

New member
Joined
24 Oct 2001
Messages
888
Location
Melbourne/Australia
Visit site
Buggered if I know...I have a mate who wouldn't deploy anything BUT a para...me I wold rather a tow some thing..BUT you didn't mention in really heavy conditions , when do you start reacghing for the prayer book ?
BrianJ
 

zefender

Active member
Joined
9 Jul 2001
Messages
1,741
Location
quacious
Visit site
I know this subject has come up many times but a clear view never emerges. I too have just read the excellent Heavy Weather Sailing. It seems to argue in favour of Sea Anchors provided that the boat is heavier displacement, long keeled and able to take the waves on the nose. With a lighter displacement, the view seems to be to keep sailing the boat at about 30 deg to the waves and then luff at their peak before starting again. This is fine if you have a big, fit racing crew on board but not if short-handed. There must also be a point when this tactic becomes impossible. A drogue seems to be a sensible option (sea room permitting) and doesn't entail the storage problems required of 600+ft of 1" warp but then you risk pitchpoling or a poop. It seems that the best strategy is to try everything until the best way is found which suits the boat and the conditions. I suppose practice makes perfect but nobody seems to want to go out into near survival conditions to get the hang of it! It does seem though that most of the disaster stories seem to involve good preparation being wrecked by a freak rogue wave or sudden change in conditions.
 

AndrewB

Well-known member
Joined
7 Jun 2001
Messages
5,850
Location
Dover/Corfu
Visit site
There never will be a definitive answer ...

... that's the premise of 'Heavy Weather Sailing': all you can do is share experience and draw your own conclusions about what strategy you plan to adopt if it happens to you.

Very few people have experienced F9+ sufficiently often, and with sufficient sang froid, to "to try everything until the best way is found which suits the boat and the conditions".

I once did a little survey of blue water cruisers to find out what they had done. I found 12 who had experienced 'survival' conditions in open ocean. All of them had heaved-to and sat it out: no sea-anchors, no drogues. And that's what I did too in a F10. Even the Hiscocks usually heaved-to, according to their cruising books.

The risk of course is of being inverted or even rolled, and 6 people told me that had happened to them. The moral I drew was to think right through the boat in terms of what would happen in a capsize: try to make it reasonably water-tight with the washboards closed, make sure heavy things would not fall loose.

I've tried trailing warps in a F8 in open sea, and by slowing the boat it does make the risk of broaching and pitchpoling feel a lot reduced, but there again the sea state in a F8 is very different to a storm. I have a friend who sailed up-Channel in a F11 some years ago and was capsized despite trailing warps (there was a short account of his experience in YM which I'll reproduce some time).

I'd take a series drogue, yes, but as you rightly say, its only going to be useful in deep water with a LOT of sea room. Think 24 hours at 5 knots ...
 

jamesjermain

Active member
Joined
16 May 2001
Messages
2,723
Location
Cargreen, Cornwall
Visit site
Where and what you sail

The gale you mention occured off Portland so I wonder whether you want your storm kit for cruising in comparatively 'local' waters (ie Channel, North Sea etc) or whether you are equipping for ocean crossing.

It seems to me that for British and near Continental waters, a long keeled boat with good storm canvas should be able to survive just about anything either by actively sailing or by heaving to.

A well sorted storm jib and main with three reefs is so much easier to handle than even a series drogue. You are in greater control of your direction should sea room be an issue. A tri-sail is an additional safety measure but in my view is only needed in the event of you losing your boom, or needing to jury rig.

Heaving to in your sort of boat should allow you to ride out a severe gale of Force 9 and even a Storm 10 (this is from reading and listening, I hasten to add, not experience). It is the easiest option for the crew and, in open waters away from shipping lanes, both crew can stay below (a radar with a proximity alarm makes this even more feasible)

If you regularly plan trips across Biscay or into high latitudes or remoter reagions of the oceans then the addition of a series drogue would seem sensible.

Everything I have heard and read about the sea or parachute anchor suggests to me that it is a potential nightmare (except for catamaran sailors). The difficulty of deployment and the dangers inherent in the manoeuvre, the stress on fittings, space required for stowage and, least of all, the problems of recovery, all suggest to me that it is a piece of kit I would not contemplate for any sailing I am likely to do.

JJ
 

ParaHandy

Active member
Joined
18 Nov 2001
Messages
5,210
Visit site
Re: Where and what you sail

James

I agree with most of what you have said. However, the primary issue is the crew’s ability to remain in active control – as zedefender remarked. I doubt we could do so for long.

There is a real problem with the reporting of these events. Dashew, I feel, is prejudiced in his commentary of the one reported incident where the sea anchor failed – the rope snapped off just beyond the bow and it is not known with precision whether this happened before or after the yacht capsized. He concludes the (nylon) rope failed due to continuous expansion & contraction prior to capsize and it was this failure which allowed the yacht to swing beam on and be rolled. (Logically, he espoused, that that being so a polyester rode would be more suitable.) If I recall correctly, the yacht had lain for 24 hrs beforehand so this was no “normal” storm and that, I think, might be the nub of the problem: in most situations a sea anchor will work, as will most other techniques, but might be more suitable for a “shorthanded” yacht.

What I do find difficult to believe is why, if a catamaran is particularly suited to a sea anchor, that does not apply to a monohull. I sailed a cat for many years. In Dashew’s report the yacht did not use a bridle.
 

AndrewB

Well-known member
Joined
7 Jun 2001
Messages
5,850
Location
Dover/Corfu
Visit site
Proximity alarm? Forget it!

Quite useless in severe gale conditions! Indeed my radar, which is a typical yacht model, becomes unreadable in a F8 and big seas. Visibility can be reduced so that quick look-outs aren't necessarily that much help either. A small yacht heaved-to or lying to a sea-anchor is very much at the mercy of shipping in a busy area. An active strategy, running with warps or a drogue, with someone on deck, might have advantages here.

Ships do try to make allowances in bad conditions, but they may well have their own problems.
 
G

Guest

Guest
K Adlard Cole's "Heavy Weather Sailing" advocates running before a storm, if I remember correctly. We prefer running to heaving to, and we have a Jordan Series Drogue to deploy. We have deployed it once, though more for practice than because we actually needed it.

Hanging off a sea anchor not only places tremendous loads on fittings and gear, it puts your rudder at risk as the boat slams backwards. Heaving to is more sea kindly, because you are making way, albeit very, very slowly.

We don't like heaving to because our deep fin keel just doesn't lend itself to the tactic, and the one time we did it we were uncomfortable and blew out our sail. Running without any drogue places the boat at risk of broaching as you accelerate down a wave and the skipper becomes increasingly fatigued. The series drogue solves several problems - the boat is slowed down so that waves roll under the boat rather than allowing the boat to surf down them, and because of the many small cones along its length, there is constant pressure rather than slacking and tightening which causes shock loads. It keeps the stern of the boat steady, making steering much easier. The problem, of course, is that you need a lot of sea room to run in front of the storm. Given that, though, the motion is much gentler and that in itself enables the crew to rest.

I do not believe that you should give up standing watch. Big ships will never see your small boat in all that sea clutter, so it is imcumbent upon you to do everything you can to see them, and call their attention to you.

Fair winds,
Jeanne
 

Bergman

New member
Joined
27 Nov 2002
Messages
3,788
Visit site
I have tinkered with drouges in moderate - rough conditions just to try them, and not had a great deal of success. Let me be clear this was nothing like survival conditions, just experimenting.

Towing an improvised drogue was ok, held the boat close enough to allow the autohelm to work when the sea and wind were from similar direction. When the wind and sea were not more or less in line it rather fell apart, the drogue wanted me to go down wind and I wanted to go down the line of the waves.

I tried hanging the thing over the bows and it was useless, the bows repeated fell away from the wind and waves and left us across the seas feeling very vulnerable, did'nt care for it.

I have on occasion found using the deep reefed main and slow running engine reasonably successful, steering the boat as close as I could into the sea, rather like the fishing boats "dodging" tactic. This was in around 30 - 35 knots and whether it would be any good in significantly worse stuff I don't know, probably depend on engine power I guess.

I have never tried a series drogue but the theory of it sounds about right, if (when) I get the chance for blue water stuff I think I would take one.
 

charles_reed

Active member
Joined
29 Jun 2001
Messages
10,413
Location
Home Shropshire 6/12; boat Greece 6/12
Visit site
Having already spouted on the subject on a previous post - I'll just say that I agree with the consensus - however

the only eventuality examined is the use of a drogue in storm conditions.

The use of a drogue is far more versatile than just for use in storm conditions - but does need an effective bridle with sound attachment points and powerful adjustment systems.

Downwind sailing with damaged or missing rudder - I've found it easy to "set" a boat up to self-steer going to windward under this situation but only a drogue will let you steer easily going downwind.

Slowing down in comfort - I've had the irony of closing a tidal gate ahead of time, as an alternative to reducing sail or heaving to, trailing a drogue is very satisfactory.

Another point, when running off under storm conditions, the drogue (on bridle and powerful adjustment) allows about 90 degrees of variation in course - quite enough to avoid other vessels (if you can see them).

The most I've experienced for any time is a mean of 54 knots true - heaving to worked quite adequately - though 3 reefs in the main would have been insufficient , I was using 4 - under the yankee rolled down to storm jib proportions.

The bridle system I use is 18mm Dacron from one aft mooring cleat (specially strengthened) to the genoa sheet on the opposite side.

I still maintain the best thing to do is to keep out of the way of heavy weather - the sort of storm conditions which we are referring to are all adequately signalled up especially in the N hemisphere.
With 60 hours of warning you need to be able to travel 300 miles - that needs an LWL of about 28', that, with some basic met knowledge is a far better precaution against storm force conditions than any drogues, paranchors etc.
 

ParaHandy

Active member
Joined
18 Nov 2001
Messages
5,210
Visit site
Re: There never will be a definitive answer ...

Many thanks to you all.

I have an abiding fear of running before a storm because the danger is behind you and turning your face into it is akin to poking your head out of a car at 40+mph in the driving rain.

Just as a postscript: I talked to a sea anchor manufacturer who reckoned the Pardey bridle technique to be unworkable and now recommends attaching chain (20mtrs or so) from the boat to the 100mtrs of (braided not 3 strand) nylon rope attached to the sea anchor with a second line (attached at the join between chain and nylon) brought back to a stern winch. The arrangement purports to manage the boats angle to wind and sea. I think it probably would do.
 
G

Guest

Guest
We would love to be warned of bad weather, but

it doesn't always happen. Back in '95 we were sailing from the Solomon Islands to Vanuatu. In the S. Pacific Arnold, on Arnold's net, gives weather reports twice a day to the cruising yachts. We had waited for more than a week for a weather window to open, since going to weather in that part of the S. Pacific can be difficult. A day out and the weather started to deteriorate, but Arnold's reports indicated that there was nothing to worry about, so we slogged on. Two days out and it was getting REALLY worse, but now we were just about to the halfway point, so turning around seemed to be futile, especially since the weather reports indicated that things were going to be better further on. On the fourth day out Arnold came on the air to tell us that he had spent several hours talking with the various weather services in Australia and Fiji to find out why the few (very few) yachts out there were having such a terrible time. Well, there was a nasty low out there that wasn't picked up by any weather service until that day, and only, we assume, because Arnold kept bugging the bureaus to look harder. Their excuse was that the system was in a zone that was between the limits of each service's radar. No matter. We then, one day or so before landfall, learned that the weather was terrible, and was going to continue to be terrible, for several more days.

So of course one tries to avoid going out in bad weather. But sometimes you can't help it. Or the passage is so long that a weather system is guaranteed to overtake you on your passage. We have never been in weather we couldn't handle, but then, we have always been prepared, mentally and physically, for the worst. However, we have had a few "passages from Hell". Sail long enough, to enough places, and you're bound to come up with one sometime.

That said,
fair winds,
Jeanne
 

Mirelle

N/A
Joined
30 Nov 2002
Messages
4,532
Visit site
Re: There never will be a definitive answer ...

I am with Andrew B. on this I think. Much depends on the boat, but the main worry, for me, in home waters, has been running out of searoom. Our 1930's gaff cutter, long keel with a cut away forefoot, heaves to rather nicely under close reefed mainsail and staysail and on the one occasion when this was too much sail she remained comfortably hove to under close reefed staysail only. The tricky bit was letting the staysail draw as the main came down.

Having had a bit of trouble with rudders I am very scared of rudder damage and would not risk having the boat set back on the rudder, so no sea anchor from the bow for me! Indeed I think that when hove to the boat should be forging slowly ahead at about 1 knot so as to reduce the risk of her being set back on the rudder; this effectively means that she more or less makes a square drift, which is good from the sea room point of view.

I agree with Andrew about radar, but I respectfully differ a bit about the difficulty of collision avoidance; to get under way from the hove to position should not be that hard, but it would take a couple of minutes (which you might not have!)

These thoughts apply to home waters only.
 

charles_reed

Active member
Joined
29 Jun 2001
Messages
10,413
Location
Home Shropshire 6/12; boat Greece 6/12
Visit site
Re: We would love to be warned of bad weather, but

Obviously I didn't make my point clear.

The risk is in expecting "to be advised of bad weather", I'm afraid that metmen have and will continue to get their forecasts wrong.
We have to take the responsibility for our own forecasting and getting the weather right.
Admittedly 6 years ago the information revolution hadn't got to the point we're at now, so that it would have been difficult to get the wefaxes, grib files, sat pix etc that we can get now.

But you had a barometer?
That is still the most effective instrument for the local forecaster.

Look at all the yachties that "blamed" the aussie Met Office for the Sydney Hobart disaster - but I heard of one skipper who looked at the forecasts, and at the wefaxes and then retired, because he didn't trust the squash zone to the NE of the race area.
 
Top