The anchoring debate - a truly worldwide subject

from ra personal observations, youse ken, when considering where to anchor and there's a buoy near to hand - especially a north or, at a pinch, a west cardinal where the two wee cones really snag the rope - some prefer the cardinal.

east or south cardinals, must be useless.

this ought to mean that the probability of finding such a convenient cardinal is more likely on a north coast than a south coast? this observation was proved recently when i came upon a brit tied up to a north cardinal somewhere off france ....
 
[ QUOTE ]


Good to see Hylas batting for his Spade there as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Chris.. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Hummmm.. difficult to me for not batting for my anchors there.. /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

but I'm also batting to change old and wrong ideas about anchoring.. like:
- more weight will give more holding
- the line should be an all chain one
- a "kellet" (or chum) will increase holding..
- the "tandem set" technique will increase the holding..

and some more.. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

It is not an easy task.. and doing that, I have nothing to sell.. only the hope to increase the security of those who are lisening to my suggestions..

But months after months.. years after years.. I can note a change in the mind of more and more people... /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
 
You can NEVER have an anchor that is too heavy!nor enough oversize chain, nor the stemhead built to match them and marina size cleats or samson posts to hold them..The veracity?That I am here writing this!

And of course all those new lightweight jobbies,stretchy warp are wonderfully clever too.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Good to see Hylas batting for his Spade there as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks Chris.. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Hummmm.. difficult to me for not batting for my anchors there.. /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif

but I'm also batting to change old and wrong ideas about anchoring.. like:
- more weight will give more holding
- the line should be an all chain one
- a "kellet" (or chum) will increase holding..
- the "tandem set" technique will increase the holding..

and some more.. /forums/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

It is not an easy task.. and doing that, I have nothing to sell.. only the hope to increase the security of those who are lisening to my suggestions..

But months after months.. years after years.. I can note a change in the mind of more and more people... /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[/ QUOTE ]


Are you suggesting that a tandem system (i.e a piggyback anchor) will not increase the holding power?
Because if you are, you are talking unmitigated BOLLOX!
Oil rigs have been using piggybacks for years in areas where the holding ground is suspect - it is a system that works, and there is no reason in principle why it should not work for smaller craft too.

Other statements you make are totally false too.
I came to the conclusion a long time ago that your opinion about anchoring techniques is seriously flawed (and don't tell me you have never dragged an anchor). I'm not going to get into a protracted argument with you, I can't be arsed - it just bothers me that some less experienced people reading your posts could get themselves into trouble by believing some of the rubbish you come out with!

I know nothing about the Spade anchor and I'm not commenting on something I know nothing about. I have experience of anchor systems in commercial vessels from 2,000 tonnes up to 300,000 tonnes, oilrigs and yachts.
 
Whilst hylas could be considered to have asked for such a response, and taken alone his comments deserved it, having read his previous 'more complete' observations I am sure you aren't taking the literal comments over their wider arguments just because you can?

for example - making the same points slightly
more expansively:

a well designed anchor of, say, 10kg will out perform a 20kg ball of concrete

a 20 kg anchor will outperform 2x 10kg anchors in tandem of the same design

a 20kg anchor will outperform a 10kg one of the same design+ a 10kg chum (wherever it is placed on the rode)

I will leave the all chain issue as it has been done to death many many times...........

I am sure hylas will comment if he feels I am not representing his conclusions/arguments correctly.
 
[a well designed anchor of, say, 10kg will out perform a 20kg ball of concrete]

How many boats do you see with a lump of concrete on the bow roller?


[a 20 kg anchor will outperform 2x 10kg anchors in tandem of the same design]

Of course it will. The idea of a piggyback anchor is to add another anchor onto your main bower in order to increase it's holding power. 2x10kg anchors in tandem is clearly going to outperform 1x10kg anchor!


[a 20kg anchor will outperform a 10kg one of the same design+ a 10kg chum (wherever it is placed on the rode)]

The point of a 'chum' is that it will help maintain a catenary and ease snatching in a situation where the boat is pitching or yawing or surging back and forth, therefore it will help to prevent an anchor breaking out. No-one has suggested that the weight of a chum is a substitute for weight within the anchor.

'Chums' and piggybacks are gear that is <u>added to</u> the normal anchoring equipment.
 
[ QUOTE ]

Are you suggesting that a tandem system (i.e a piggyback anchor) will not increase the holding power?
Because if you are, you are talking unmitigated BOLLOX!
Oil rigs have been using piggybacks for years in areas where the holding ground is suspect - it is a system that works, and there is no reason in principle why it should not work for smaller craft too.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hi TUGBOAT..

Well!.., very pleased to have the chance for batting again.. :0) and as it is about general ideas about anchoring... although I'm an anchor designer, I can speak freely :0)

YES.. YES.. YES I'm suggesting that a tandem system will not increase the holding power?

Don't compare it with Oilrigs!. they are different anchors and different anchoring technics..

From my own study, (about 70 cases, with diving on each one) the two anchors are set in only 32% of the cases.. and if the wind (or curent) will shift 180°... in 100% of the cases, only one anchor will remain set..

I consider the "tandem set" anchoring technic as a "Russian Roulette" anchoring!..

And one good 20 kg anchor will give by far, /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif a much better holding than two bad ones tandem set!.. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Other statements you make are totally false too.
I came to the conclusion a long time ago that your opinion about anchoring techniques is seriously flawed (and don't tell me you have never dragged an anchor). I'm not going to get into a protracted argument with you, I can't be arsed - it just bothers me that some less experienced people reading your posts could get themselves into trouble by believing some of the rubbish you come out with!


[/ QUOTE ]

This time, You are probably Right!!!.. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif but I'm very pleased to inform you that, after the French and the German version.. the English version of my book telling all my (obviously false!) theories... /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif has been accepted for publication by one of the biggest American publisher!! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

Fortunately for me, they are a few crazy poeple who agree with all my wrong theories.. /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif (and we are working now on the Spanish version!!!)


[ QUOTE ]
I know nothing about the Spade anchor and I'm not commenting on something I know nothing about. I have experience of anchor systems in commercial vessels from 2,000 tonnes up to 300,000 tonnes, oilrigs and yachts.

[/ QUOTE ]

But to be honest with you.. EVERYBODY knows that the Spade is one of the worse anchor actually on the market!!! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]


The point of a 'chum' is that it will help maintain a catenary and ease snatching in a situation where the boat is pitching or yawing or surging back and forth, therefore it will help to prevent an anchor breaking out. No-one has suggested that the weight of a chum is a substitute for weight within the anchor.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm very surprise by your comments comming from somebody who "have experience of anchor systems in commercial vessels from 2,000 tonnes up to 300,000 tonnes, oilrigs and yachts. "!..

Which weight of "chum" are you using?? 20 kg?? and what will be the usefullness of 20 kg weight, when the pulling force will be more than 500 kg??

I'm sorry, but its seems that although you have a GREAT anchoring experience!!! /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif.. your opinion about anchoring techniques is also seriously flawed /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
You can NEVER have an anchor that is too heavy!

[/ QUOTE ]

That's a bit OTT, isn't it? I've seen more yachts than enough that are bows down because the skipper/owner has been over cautious. I once sailed a large (72 feet) yacht which carried on her foredeck a fisherman's anchor which weighed well in excess of 1cwt and which nobody could lift without a mechanical advantage lift. As this took a while to rig the darned thing stayed where it was and was hardly ever used. Just a useless piece of badly sited ballast.
 
[ QUOTE ]
. I once sailed a large (72 feet) yacht which carried on her foredeck a fisherman's anchor which weighed well in excess of 1cwt and which nobody could lift without a mechanical advantage lift.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you needed to anchor in preparation for a hurricane I bet you would find a way to get it over the side. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

For every boat with a monster anchor like that there must be a hundred with woefully inadequate anchors.Often sticking out over the marina pontoon still with the chandlers bar code sticker on. /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif
 
It is, indeed, a truly worldwide subject. To follow these anchoring threads you would think nobody had ever successfully anchored before! All over the world thousands of boaters are using name brand anchors on conventional tackle, conservatively sized, and their systems are working effectively. Anchoring is in many ways a confidence trick; if you are confident in your system, no matter how inadequate it is in reality, you will enjoy undisturbed slumber. On the other hand, some skippers can't sleep at anchor no matter how oversized and well proven their system is. Because of this someone is always going to be coming up with the next great anchor or anchoring gadget. As these threads prove, they have a large and eager audience.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Anchoring is in many ways a confidence trick

[/ QUOTE ]
if by this you mean it is a bit of an art, rather than a pure science, for most leisure boat situations then I am with you all the way. You can have th e'right' gear for the craft but just turning up, where you want, regardless of conditions etc and dumping over the side isn't anchoring!
As suggested by Graham above there seems to be an increasing number who now believe the whole of boating to be be based around this sort of principle though.
 
I think that anchoring is all about having the right tackle and deploying it effectively. Yes, a bit of science and a bit of art. When I say anchoring is a confidence trick, I mean that unless the anchorer has confidence in his system, whatever that might be, he will never be comfortable at anchor. It's the perception that matters. Each time you anchor successfully your confidence builds and eventually you become a happy hooker. Usually the confidence is fully justified because the sea doesn't let you fool it for very long. Occasionally you get reverses, when your hitherto perfect system lets you down, your confidence is shaken and has to be rebuilt. Because anchoring seems a bit tenuous to the inexperienced, (and sometimes to the very experienced!), they search for equipment, systems and techniques that appear to give guarantees of success. That's why these debates are so active and why purveyors of the latest anchor, alarm system, windlass, snubber et al find a ready market.
 
Good points - especially the last sentence.

For medium sized motorboats especially though, the manufacturers wish to have it look good, sit well on a bow fitting and price do leave plenty of room for aftermarket improvement.
 
Spending most of our time in European waters where Hurricanes Hardly Happen it seemed to be more in the way of excess baggage than useful gear. If a hurricane was threatened I would not like to be at anchor anywhere, whatever size and weight the anchors are.
 
Quite agree.

One thing I have noticed though is that those who anchor with a big anchor (of whatever type) and plenty of heavy chain don't seem to have any problems and will quite happily tell you that their anchor is the best regardless of how it performed in the often mentioned tests.
 
[ QUOTE ]
doh, now look what you've started!

[/ QUOTE ]

Oi! It was you started this one! /forums/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

I've given myself a smack for rising to Hylas' bait. If peeps want to believe him, I guess that's up to them. Afraid I won't be buying one of his anchors <u>or</u> one of his books. I hate it when people set themselves up to be experts in order to sell their stuff. /forums/images/graemlins/mad.gif

If I could bother to learn how, I'd post a pic of a 20 tonne Bruce anchor - that'd show him! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]

If I could bother to learn how, I'd post a pic of a 20 tonne Bruce anchor -

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi tugboat.

It seems that you've still a lot of things to learn!!!.. /forums/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Is that the promised photo??

BruceOilrig.jpg


As I told before: noting to compare with "yacht" anchors..

[ QUOTE ]
Afraid I won't be buying one of his anchors <u>or</u> one of his books. I hate it when people set themselves up to be experts

[/ QUOTE ]

Please don't feel obliged to..

Others anchor manufacturers have also the right to live!.. /forums/images/graemlins/smile.gif

And for the book, it is reserved only to poeple who can understand it! /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

And did you said before: "I have experience of anchor systems in commercial vessels from 2,000 tonnes up to 300,000 tonnes, oilrigs and yachts".

Sorry, but "I hate it when people set themselves up to be experts" /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
but I'm also batting to change old and wrong ideas about anchoring

[/ QUOTE ]
Old ideas (especially regarding seamanship) are very rarely wrong.

Time, not theories, prove the effectiveness of systems and practices. On the other hand, I appreciate the way you fight over your ideas as this is the only way that things go for the better (when it is the case, of course).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top