Spade anchor size and insurance

rwoofer

rwoofer

Well-Known Member
Joined
1 Apr 2003
Messages
3,355
Location
Surrey
Visit site
I'm considering getting a spade anchor because it will fit in my anchor locker. The problem is that I want to get one size smaller than is recommended on the Spade website. The one I want is 10kg and the one recommended is 15kg.

Now my boat is only 3 tonnes and 29 feet, so 15kg does seem like overkill to me as competing and supposedly inferior anchors such as a Delta recommend only 10kgs. If I used the 10kg Spade and the boat dragged, would my insurance be valid?

In answer to my own question, I suspect the insurance companies would use manufacturers recommendations to wriggle out of a claim, but it does seem completely daft that they go on unregulated manufacturer recommendations to assess risk. Personally I would feel less safe with the 10kg Delta, which real world tests would concur with, yet my insurance company would be the other way around.........we're in a mad world!

So what does the panel think?
 
When insurance underwriters control everything that we may or may not do, the world has gone mad.
The question is: Under the circumstances you make the claim, will the anchor still attached to the boat, and will they be able to prove what you deployed?
 
We have a 2.5 tonne 27ft boat with a 10Kg Spade. It is more than adequate . . . we used it to replace a 15Kg CQR as our primary anchor.

If a 10Kg delta will do your boat then so will a 10Kg Spade - the manufacturers are just doing a bit of a**e covering.

I believe that Hylas - the inventor of the Spade - uses a size down from the recommended size for his boat.
 
Going through their selector

http://www.spade-anchor.co.uk/sd_range111.htm

< 35' <4.5t

Fair weather coastal cruising normal seabeds

http://www.spade-anchor.co.uk/S60.htm i.e. 10kg

extended cruising difficult seabeds S80 i.e. 15kg

there is also a big gap in their next boat size down:

<25' <2T S40 for fair weather coastal normal sea beds
S60 for extended cruising with difficult seabeds.

Looks like you could justify the 10kg.

Rocna recommend 10kg for your size/displacement, (30' <5T) - have they got one for you to test for fit on the boat?

Why not email your insurance company - when I asked pantaenius to comment on my anchor and possible replacements, they had nothing to say about anchors other than they dont get many anchor failure related claims, so dont consider it a big issue.

Richard
 
As Richard said, we would recommend a 10 for your boat and would even be happy to provide a letter endorsing the sizing choice along with justification if you were concerned about it.

There's little more you could do to impress the insurance company, but don't worry about it. In the event of an incident, the local authority would investigate (I assume the MAIB in the UK) - you would only be found wanting had you used a very clearly inadequate anchor. You can read about a relevant example where a Spade failed and the boat was lost (nb. please don't take that as an attack on the Spade from me, I don't know enough about the incident to comment - I link to it only to give you an idea of how arguments might proceed in such an event).

For larger boats/ships and associated anchoring equipment, one gets into regulatory matters where classification such as Lloyds is useful/required, but that has no application at this size range.
 
Sadly I think email to insurance company is the only way to be sure.

The problem that I have with the Spade sizing recommendation is the terminology used. For example the anchor recommended for fair weather sailing is, as you point out, the 10kg S60 and the anchor recommended for a kedge anchor is also the 10kg S60. This seems to imply that the 10kg is too light, because ordinarily the kedge is at least one size down from the main anchor. This is why I was thinking that the 15kg anchor recommended for difficult seabed areas would be their actual recommendation. Would be much easier if they said 6kg for kedge, 10kg for normal cruising needs and 15kg for high latitudes sailing.

The Rocna was the other choice and I have been speaking to the importers. Unfortunately it is not possible to try a Rocna, so I have worked on the basis of the measurements which suggest it will be too large with the roll bar to fit in the anchor locker. Shame as it is considerably cheaper than Spade and also has the hole in the shank to secure the anchor on the bow roller if I leave it there.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I believe that Hylas - the inventor of the Spade - uses a size down from the recommended size for his boat.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's reassuring since he seems to be working his way around the world in the normal latitudes - what I would term normal cruising in fact. Maybe he can comment.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Sadly I think email to insurance company is the only way to be sure.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you get a positive answer, that would give you some assurance. If you get a negative answer or no definitive answer (the most likely outcome) you will have alerted them to the issue, and the fact that you are concerned - which might be used against you later.

Sometimes (not always) it is better not to ask.
 
I have a 3000kg (plus 500kg in full start of cruising mode, yes I have kids) 31ft yacht and use a A60 Spade (the 4.5kg alloy 60 versions, my secondary is the same). Happy as a pig in pooh.

I also used a Rocna 10 over summer and was also as happy as the pig above.

As an aside - The 2 alloy Spades comform to international yachting race rules as does the Rocna 10. Hence the 2 alloys are on now for less than 10kg total, nice.

You'll be happy on either the Spade model 60 or Rocna 10 with a good rode behind either. My rode is 15mts of 7mm short link to 50mts of 12mm polyester octiplait. I could cut the chain back to 10mts if I wasn't to lazy to pick up the boltcutters. I would also go to 14mm warp if full time cruising only, same chain.

No way 15kg.

{edit} I deal with insurance claims on anchoring gear often. I've never seen or heard of any insurance company asking about 'the sizing'. Doesn't mean they might not though if the accident investigator says something. Mind you I've never heard of them saying anything either except for the Mirrabella V incident, then again I'm guessing your boat is not worth US$100 million odd. FYI - it wasn't an anchor issue. It was the dickheads who specified the size. They didn't allow for the boat having anything above deck i.e a 100mt odd high mast, what idiots.
 
[ QUOTE ]
You can read about a relevant example where a Spade failed and the boat was lost (nb. please don't take that as an attack on the Spade from me, I don't know enough about the incident to comment

[/ QUOTE ] Then you should have kept quiet shouldn't you, Craig. This is the most blatant peice of dodgy negative competition-knocking marketeering we have yet seen from you on this forum. If I had any commercial interest in the Spade I would be asking a moderator to pull this post.

This incident - involving a yacht called 'Deep Blue' - is shrouded in mystery . . . allegedly the bolt attaching the shank to the head failed, yet if the anchor is properly set the Spade will hold with the bolt absent entirely - this has been demonstrated in public tests. Googling it will bring up a discussion elsewhere which will give some information.

There were a LOT of strange factors in this grounding and loss, and the subsequent report . . . and for you to post the above quoted sentence is thoroughly misleading IMO.

- Nick
 
Easy for a moment, please.

I had no previous knowledge of the Spade "failure" until this thread but can see that - technically - the guy is right that failure of the bolt mightl cause the anchor to fail.

Craig Rocna is acting within reason to bring up the site's allegations, and is open about his own commercial interests and specialist knowledge.

Surely it's up to Spade to indicate openly whether the design has been changed as a result of customer experience and feedback ?


If you have details of any other sites where the events are presented in a different light, it would be useful to post them, please /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
I believe the Spade was modified to include a split pin for additional security. The Spade site does actually talk quite openly about this incident and does conclude that there was insufficient evidence (which I agree with) to be sure.

However I understand a court suggested it as a likely cause - not sure how that could happen unless some of the evidence was not made public.
 
Re: Unfair to Craig?

In 2005 Craig said publicly in a forum discussion of this incident elsewhere:

[ QUOTE ]
No good tradesman blames his tools

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Have to say I agree with (previous poster) above. In theory the Spade shank will not easily come out even if the pin is not present, so who knows. Anyway, it is the responsibility of the owner to learn and understand his or her equipment.


[/ QUOTE ] This showed remarkable restraint at the time . . . but it seems that two years later he is unable to resist using this unfortunate incident to score points.

I think posting a link now to the website of the couple who suffered the loss of their yacht and tried to sue Spade for it is more of a cynical marketing ploy than an attempt to provide impartial information.

Of course, I may be wrong - it has been known /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif

If Craig really wanted to be helpful I suggest he could have posted links to:

THE MSA REPORT
and
SPADE'S REPLY

- Nick
 
Re: Unfair to Craig?

Thanks for that, Webcraft.

The information on the sites is, shall we say, mutually contentious ?

Even in an agricultural environment, we know enough about Nyloc to use new ones on key components when serviced.

I think that Spade have done the right thing by modifying the design and issuing a customer warning to users of older Spades. I am, however, rather perplexed by the statement from Spade which talks about

"At boat shows we often demonstrate this by removing the bolt completely and pulling the anchor as per normal operation. Even when “break out” is simulated the shank remains inserted in the socket clearly showing that the bolt simply holds the two sections together. "

and

"Even if the anchor blade had become separated from the shank, the shank and chain alone would have been able to hold the vessel under the weather conditions of the time."

The idea of a shank and the chain being enough to anchor a boat does stretch the imagination quite a bit !


From my own professional point of view, I would hesitate to use any piece of equipment that has a SPOF (single point of failure) which is as simple as a frequently undone bolt and a Nylock nut. That is just asking for an event impact and serious consequences. I want my anchors to work without having to replace a nut every time (and yes, I have a fisherman, too!)

Thanks for giving the info and URLs.
 
Re: Unfair to Craig?

Nick, perhaps you could reconsider your comments. I posted the link to that site mostly because it hosts the precise documents you linked to directly above and gives a very good and relevent example of what the opening poster is interested in, specifically that the outcome of such incidents depend heavily upon organizations like the MAIB - not the insurance companies directly, who do not have policies which talk in great detail about anchors... The OP, if he is interested, will find those documents - and needs to consider the site in the complete context.

For my part, from a position without full possesion of the facts like anyone else uninvolved, the letter from Spade NZ's attorney appears reasonable, and as pointed out therein, Spade have also (long since) modified the design and their instructions in accordance with the NZ investigation's recommendations. For the record, I do not consider the incident particularly damning of the Spade.
 
Re: Unfair to Craig?

[ QUOTE ]
The idea of a shank and the chain being enough to anchor a boat does stretch the imagination quite a bit

[/ QUOTE ] - Not if you listen to half the posters on here who say weight is all-important. Mind you , Deep Blue only had 10m of chain then nylon. Then again it was pretty calm . . .

I just wonder why the other crew members on deck didn't notice the yacht drifting in towards the beach until she grounded, and why the yacht was anchored so close in on such a short scope anyway - less than 3-1 on a mixed rode with an onshore swell and the beach very close is asking for trouble and very unseamanlike IMO.


[ QUOTE ]
From my own professional point of view, I would hesitate to use any piece of equipment that has a SPOF (single point of failure) which is as simple as a frequently undone bolt and a Nylock nut. That is just asking for an event impact and serious consequences. I want my anchors to work without having to replace a nut every time

[/ QUOTE ] I would imagine that 99% of Spade owners never undo the nut as the anchor remains assembled. Ours has remained assembled for four years, and I have never felt the need to renew or modify the bolt.

I used to fly microlights. Many vital structural connections on the airframe were held by single nylocs that were never renewed but also never replaced unless they had been removed for some reason. This is CAA approved and inspected engineering practice. There is no requirement to ever renew an in-place nylock that is still on its first use.

There is no indication in the Deep Blue report as to when the anchor was first assembled or whether it has been disassembled and reassembled prior to the incident. This to my mind was a major failing on the part of the MSA.

Anyway, my intention wasn't to go over this incident again, more a dig at Craig for using an emotively worded link to an obviously biased website. He has now defended himself in the post above this one, so I don't think much more needs to be said except that from an insurance point of view this was about the alleged physical failure of an anchor, not about an undersized anchor.
 
Re: Unfair to Craig?

MMM!

Innocently, or deliberately, I think Craig picked the wrong example here.

The question is about insurance companies and anchors, and Deep Blue wasnt insured, so no evidence of how an insurance company might try to wriggle out of an anchor issue.

Deep Blues' anchor was a Spade, a direct competitor of Rocna, whereas an issue with a plough, or a Delta, may not have aroused the same suspicions.

It may just be that Craig trawled his archives and, as they would be full of stuff which helps the Rocna v Spade case, this was the one which was closest to fitting the question.

The Geocities site has exceeded its' data limits, so I cant see it yet, but I am on the fence at the moment, possibly falling off on the same side as webcraft?? (and I'm quite a fan).

My background is sales, and I also wrote an MBA dissertation on segmenting and targetting a market, (I dont have a copy, and dont know where it is), but it aint rocket science.

I dont know what Rocnas' business model is, or how many anchors they sell versus the targets they set themselves but, if I were Rocna, I would be doing my damndest to get a selection of Rocna anchors on display in every chandlery possible - in the world, (or in stock at online chandleries). I would start with major centres and work from there.

I would certainly make sure that you could have one delivered within days of ordering at retail price with no delivery charges, (I say this because a month before leaving Lagos, I asked Sopromar if they could get me a Rocna before I left, and I provided them with both european distributors details - they couldnt guarantee it!). This wouldnt be the ideal solution, but a start.

At the moment, if you want an anchor in Europe, and you visit a chandlery, the odds are that there will be a few ploughs, maybe some deltas, danforths, bruces, fortress, but definitely no Rocnas, and probably no Spades.

It might mean a significant investment and supplying them on payment when sold terms, but it is no surprise to me that the anchors you see on the bows of most vessels are those you can buy by walking into a shop, handing over your money, and walking out with the anchor, (staggering out maybe).

If the above isnt an option, then Rocnas biggest sales job should be to get chandlers to buy and stock their anchors, and see them fly off the shelves.

If the anchors are as good as they say, it would only take a few sales in any particular area for word to get round, and many new sales would be Rocna.

I also think that if Spade and Rocna achieved the same penetration, i.e. you could walk into a shop and buy either, most would buy the Rocna mainly on price.

I dont know how many sales people Rocna employ but, even with only a few, (or maybe only a Sales Director), he would be flying around the world, spending time in major yachting centres talking to chandlers. Distributors are OK, but they have other things to sell, and wont have the same motivation as the manufacturer.

Would I want that job? I think I would have to use a Rocna on my boat for a while and put it to some severe tests where I would normally expect to drag, and I might only want to do the job for 6 months a year.

In estate agency, if it wasnt on your books, you couldnt sell it, and there was nothing like For Sale boards on the streets to generate more business and I would guess that there is nothing like anchors in chandleries and on bows to do the same in the anchor business.

I guess what I am saying is that there is no need to do anything which even hints at knocking the competition, when the easiest way to sell more anchors would be to make them easy to buy.

Cheers

Richard
 
Re: Unfair to Craig?

At the very least make sure that there is a salesperson with some at the major boatshows (Southampton, Paris, Earls Court ( /forums/images/graemlins/wink.gif ) etc... ).

Marc.
 
Re: Unfair to Craig?

Actually the importers will be at SIBS, just not on their own stand. They offered to test a Rocna that is on one of the boats, but it is bigger than I need, so not much help.

I do agree that getting anchors to where people can see, touch, try etc is really important. In my case, I know the Spade fits so I can buy with confidence (if I couldn't try the Spade I doubt I would have forked out the premium cost).

I think both are great anchors from my research.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top