What an Excellent Article On Anchors

[Robin]

Is in YW this month. But then, haven't I seen it somewhere before? I'm sure I have seen the pictures and the tables of results. And the text seems very familiar. YES I've got it, I read it in France, May issue of Voiles et Voiliers.

To be fair, YW do acknowledge the origin of the article. Is this the way forward?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[brianhumber]

Are you wanting to wind the little Englander brigade up by suggesting all our magazines will be written by the French in the future?

On another tack my wife and I are so fed up with stealth taxes high marina costs crap NHS etc we are investigating downsizing the house and buying a 30+m barge for say 150,000 euros to cruise Europe when I go past 50. At present if we spend less than 30 days in UK no taxes on the pension but no doubt the b-----s in Gov will tax that in the future. At least it cheers me up researching it as the yacht is laid up for the winter.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BlueSkyNick]

I don't see a problem with this approach.

The vast majority of YM readers are not going to read V&V, so there is value in printing the same article in a UK magazine, and hence a broader audience gets the benefit of it.

Having said that, I have only glanced over YM due to lack of time, so not read the article in detail. I wouldn't want to read old material which is simply page-filling for the sake of it.

<hr width=100% size=1>I would give my right arm to be ambidexterous

 

[Robin]

Confusing isn't it. Actually the French V&V article is in Yachting World and is very well worth reading as it was when I read it in France, and it is nice to have the proper translation too. There IS an article in Yachting Monthly as well but it is not in the same league as the yachting World one.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Me, wind someone up? As if!

In Peppermints post about Yachting MONTHLY 'can it get worse' I remarked to Kim maybe they should look at the French Mags for some fresh ideas. Kim didn't reply (yet) but then I read Yachting WORLD and lo and behold there was the article taken from Voiles et Voiliers on anchors, so much better than the weak effort in YM.

And yes I would like to go the sell up and retire to France route to raise some cash out of our house here, unfortunately SWMBO says they don't speak American. So it might be the USA instead, but then they don't speak English. Got to do something to compensate for Equitable Lifeless (pension), Standard Lifeless (mortgage endowment) not to mention all the rest!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Talbot]

Of course you could do what I am going to do in a few years (when son finishes Uni) - sail out to Aus.

Nice little trip, followed by a warm country full of friendly English speaking (sort of) folk who are fine unless you mention rugby /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[jimi]

Bit extreme to call Scotland warm!

<hr width=100% size=1>.. its life but not as we know it ..

 

[Guest]

Euro-Zone ...

As far as I know as an Expat .... there is no period of non-tax INSIDE the zone for a UK / Euro resident, only agreements that double tax will not be levied.

As to days inside UK for those working etc. outside such as me .... 30 days ????? FRom where you get that number ? It is actually 90 days per year average over 4 years with no one year exceeding 120 days ...... in exceptional circumstances period can be up to 180 days .... but subsquent years have penalties .....

Of course with expansion of Euro-zone ----- this will all pass into the grey mists of time for a lot of people !! I'll move a border or two probably as well !


<hr width=100% size=1>Nigel ...
Bilge Keelers get up further ! I came - cos they said was FREE Guinness !
/forums/images/icons/cool.gif

 

[ccscott49]

Re: Euro-Zone ...

Also as an ex-pat, I`m not sure the old 90 day rule still applies, worth checking.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[claymore]

Agree really - we have similar information needs and interests as the French or any other nation that sails so why not translate articles - or is the concern that journalism is somehow devalued if articles are copied or borrowed from other sources.
I have to admit to being curious about the poor reports which Bruce (type) anchors seem to get in the YW article - We use a Bruce and have ridden out some fairly strong wind and sea conditions without a problem - each to their own then?

<hr width=100% size=1>regards
Claymore
/forums/images/icons/smile.gif

 

[Robin]

I agree too, I think the French Mags are pretty good when I get to see them. The golf mags do it, the same articles appear in the USA, the UK and France (and probably other places too that I've not seen).

With the anchor test results, maybe the types of bottom didn't favour Bruce types, even though they tested in 2 kinds and added the two results together. The Delta results were not stunning either though previous tests I have seen, including by the RNLI, rated them the bees knees. I think it goes to show there are other factors too in anchor holding in extremis, like snatch loads or like the ability to reset itself quickly after a windshift or tide change. I've been a CQR fan almost from the start but when we changed boat inherited a Delta and I'm converted, it sets instantly and I can't pull it out withh 44hp full astern everywhere I've tried so far.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

it\'s genetic

You know what they say about Bruce anchors?

If at first it doesn't set, try, try, try again.

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[MainlySteam]

Maybe we could have some articles in Strine and in New Zild too - save us having to read in our second language.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Birdseye]

Havent seen the article, but did it find, by any chance, that the Brittany or the spoon anchors were the best?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Absolutely not! The genuine good old British CQR came out tops in the 2 types of bottom they tested in. the Spade came 3rd, the Britanny 7th and last place was for the Bruce varieties. The Delta which we now use and like came only 6th.

The tests were done in heavy sand first then in gravel and the two holding power figures added together. I couldn't see why you would ADD them to give a comparative result, but when out of curiosity I AVERAGED them the league table remained the same anyway.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Twister_Ken]

Begging to differ

Having invested my £3.50 and taken a look, I'd say the article makes a good start but doesn't go far enough. Like:

Why no genuiine Danforth? The variations they had all looked like they had somewhat undernourished fluke areas.

Why no genuine Bruce? Ditto the Danforth comment above.

Apropos the Danforth and Bruce comments above, interesting to see that a genuine CQR performed much better than the CQR lookalike they tested.

Why no work to see what happened when the direction of pull changed, something critical for those sailing in tidal and/or wind-shiftal waters?

Didn't it look like they'd tested the Spade on a rope rode, not on chain?

All very well having a diver position the anchor before the pull comes on, but it would be more realistic to find out how well they set in the more typical situation of being dumped on the bottom under a few metres of chain.

Still, reassuring that those of us with a CQR up at the pointy end aren't hopeless dinosaurs, eh?

<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.writeforweb.com/twister1>Let's Twist Again</A>

 

[Robin]

Re: Begging to differ

Nothing is perfect but bearing in mind it was a French Mag commissioning tests in French waters for French readers it was pretty good. Agreed it would be better if more types could have been compared, in a wider varity of bottoms too and with more test on re-setting after break out etc but it already ran to TEN full pages!

Every anchor test I have seen has left questions unanswered, simply because there are so very many variables. I doubt even if 2 identical anchors in the same bottom at the same time would perform the same! Also the load holding ability of any tested does not exceed the expected force quoted from the wind in a true gale, yet there are endless reports of each type having done that over the years. This is a very difficult area to quantify I feel.

My own opinions have changed little over the years, I have always been a huge fan of the genuine CQR. I have (still have in the garage) a 45lb CQR copy, standard issue on the W33, that always worked very well, though I did swap it for the genuine version 'just in case'. We currently use a 35lb Delta, inherited with our current love, which is according to S-L the equivalent of a 45lb CQR in holding power and have found it excellent. It has held our 41ft (even with the extra windage of bimini, stern gantry with solar panel wind genny etc) without dragging once in the 2 seasons use so far, including 2 'vent solaires' F6 plus waves straight onshore in S Brittany, it always sets instantly first time too. I had a Danforth on one boat which was OK (nothing else fitted the anchor well) but it sometimes didn't set if weed or pebbles etc caught in the blades. I have to say I have never fancied a Bruce (anchor or antipodean).











<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Strathglass]

Re: Begging to differ

I agree with you Ken.

The original French article was well presented and very descriptive. And will probably be considered as one of the best articles on anchoring. BUT was carried out (as far as I am aware) on behalf of and to support a particular product.

If you were doing that would you test your product against Genuine Danforth or Bruce anchors.

I think it is unfortunate that as they did not test against the known standards then the credability of the tests reduces.

I believe that the spade is a very good anchor but I am sure that genuine danforth and bruce anchors would have given quite different results from the ones they used for the tests.

Iain

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Robin]

Re: Begging to differ

Sorry to disagree, there is no evidence I could see in either the original French or the Brit translation of the article to suggest it was there to 'sell' a brand. The CQR was after all the outright winner and also probably considered the benchmark against which to judge others. Are we talking about the same article? The anchors selected for test were those currently in favour by French yotties and therefore freely available, had one of our Mags done the same detailed test maybe they would have selected a different spread.

If you think it was written to promote the Spade, the results were not that good, overall 3rd place and poor holding in gravel.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[qsiv]

Re: Begging to differ

I'd agree - it really does validate some long established views...

I've always had genuine CQR's and never, ever dragged one, but then like many people I havent had been forced to lie to an anchor in much over 30 knots, being able to find a secure harbour for those conditions.

What it has done is given me some comfort that for the very limited anchoring that will be rquired with the new boat the alloy spade is good performer, and will have a place on board as weight will be critical. OTOH, the alloy Fortress that I currently have as Kedge 3, looks as though it might be better employed as a garden ornament...

<hr width=100% size=1>