What's the worst anchor?

[Neeves]

Two anchor deployed in a 'V' or fork can manage a wind that oscillates first in one direct ion then another. If you use one anchor the anchor will be constantly responding to the new tension angle, the seabed in which the single anchor is embedded will lose shear strength and the anchor can be prone to dragging. 2 anchors each orientated toward the 2 veer directions will be much more stable. it has nothing to do with an anchor being too small, nor they being inadequate - its very simply good seaman ship.

I note Noelex negative comment to use of 2 anchors what he omits to mention is that Rocna recommend a 33kg anchor for his yacht - and he uses a 50kg anchor with the hold of a 50kg Delta. A 33kg Rocna, I might suggest, could have the same hold as a 50kg Delta.

Deploying two reliable anchors might be unnecessary - but a yawing yacht is debilitating and a 'V or fork (+ a bridle) tames the movement

In an oscillating wind we would use 2 x aluminium 8kg anchors (each with the hold of a 15kg SHHP anchor), 6mm HT chain and snubbers (a bridle) capable of being extended to 30m each arm, for a catamaran with the windage of a 45' AWB, not much smaller than Noelex yacht.

If the anchorage permits shore lines are the 100% insurance.

Jonathan

 

[Poignard]

I've tried that!

Years ago, on a bareboat Eastern Med charter hol - just she and me - we found a perfect little island with a perfect little bay.... which was quite steeply shelving.
So.... as advised on all the best forums, I approached bow-to, letting go the stern anchor about 150' out which brought us up short about 80-100' from the beach.

I had to manage the boat, of course, so I directed Milady to swim ashore, a bow warp in her teeth and, once there, to wrap it three times around a tree and hold on.
( she was nbg at knots. )

That let me adjust the stern warp appropriately, then take the dinghy ashore with a towel and my wallet.... and we strolled round the headland to the village and taverna.

We took part in a French classic boat rally known as Vilaine en Fête a few years ago. One of the overnight stops was at Redon. Only large vessels were allowed in the basin and smaller craft had to drive their bows into the muddy banks of the river and run a line ashore to a tree.

When we arrived, a little late, the only people on the river bank were some old ladies from a coach party having a stroll.

I hurled our head rope ashore and shouted to the old ladies, asking them to tie the line to a tree.

It took some time to make them understand what was required but after a lot of laughing and good-natured banter in Franglais one of them understoood what was required and did as I asked.

 

[noelex]

Who said regularly?
Have you ever spent a few hours at anchor with the masthead anemometer still hard against the 60kn stop when it feels as if the wind has eased off?

Unfortunately yes, many more times than I would like.

 

[vyv_cox]

Www.xyzairanchor.com would seem to be a contender. ISTR it was in the 2007 YM test, then went out of business and has now been revived. I don't remember how it tested but it definitely was not in the leading 5 or 6, contradicting its advertising claims.

 

[srm]

Www.xyzairanchor.com would seem to be a contender. ISTR it was in the 2007 YM test, then went out of business and has now been revived. I don't remember how it tested but it definitely was not in the leading 5 or 6, contradicting its advertising claims.

Would certainly make a conversation starter in any marina.
Looks like a modern take on the prehistoric triangular stone anchor.
I would be very concerned with the lack of thimble in the short ss wire strop that description says is part of the anchor, though other pics show chain direct to the anchor.

 

[Frank Holden]

I would suggest the Fortress that - earlier this year - I dragged out from under my bunk after maybe 20 years to find that the 4 bolts required to secure the 'mud plates'(?) were AWOL rendering it worse than useless.
Yes yes , I know, and yes I carry lots of nuts and bolts asssorted but it was a lot easier and faster to deploy my knock off danforth with the bent shank.

 

[doug748]

I would suggest the Fortress that - earlier this year - I dragged out from under my bunk after maybe 20 years to find that the 4 bolts required to secure the 'mud plates'(?) were AWOL rendering it worse than useless.
Yes yes , I know, and yes I carry lots of nuts and bolts asssorted but it was a lot easier and faster to deploy my knock off danforth with the bent shank.

Well, there is no clear correlation between the money you spend and performance, so you might be better off with the Danforth.

"You get what you pay for" has always seemed like a mug's charter to me.

.

 

[Neeves]

Www.xyzairanchor.com would seem to be a contender. ISTR it was in the 2007 YM test, then went out of business and has now been revived. I don't remember how it tested but it definitely was not in the leading 5 or 6, contradicting its advertising claims.

I'm slightly more generous.

The 'inventor' has put in lots of money (the shank is cast stainless) and effort and his ideas are innovative. I like to encourage.

I have a sample of the latest iteration and its all a work of art, it fits together well, it looks the piece - but does not work (or not as intended). If you lay it upside down it self rights, it engages and 'sets' but develops no hold. The self righting concept is surprisingly good, I'm no longer sceptical. I recommended moving the crown aft and attaching a conventional shank - which works a dream (except it then does not self right) - but this went down like a ton of hot bricks and the inventor lost faith in me (he is devoted to the idea of the crown at the toe as the mini shank is also the self righting mechanism).

I had thought if he focussed on a conventional shank in a conventional location and spent his time, somehow, adding the self righting mechanism he might then have something that 'worked' - and get a reward for his efforts.

He has dismissed me as, I'm not sure, a quack? I'm fully aware it cost him to send me a sample to test

Having added a shank and showing that if it could set, but not self right (I'm not keen on roll bars) I stopped being 'innovative' - or became innovative in other projects. I may pick up the ball as I have a rather spiffy fluke looking for a role in life. Vyv's post has pricked my conscience.

Jonathan

 

[Blue Seas]

Jonathan (Neeves),
Whilst you are on line can I ask your view on a quick point if I may?
I will be replacing the anchor before next season for a trip up into the Arctic, I'm an 'old school' type so would probably stick to a Crosby or similar shackle (with Monel locking wire) between the anchor (probably a spade) and standard chain.
Before I finally commit - do you have any thoughts on more modern connectors and chain allowing for reliability as well as outright performance? Does an 'upgrade' to higher spec / lower weight chain mean a smaller diameter shackle pin and hence no gain?
Many thanks.

 

[Cariadco]

I'm slightly more generous.

The 'inventor' has put in lots of money (the shank is cast stainless) and effort and his ideas are innovative. I like to encourage.

I have a sample of the latest iteration and its all a work of art, it fits together well, it looks the piece - but does not work (or not as intended). If you lay it upside down it self rights, it engages and 'sets' but develops no hold. The self righting concept is surprisingly good, I'm no longer sceptical. I recommended moving the crown aft and attaching a conventional shank - which works a dream (except it then does not self right) - but this went down like a ton of hot bricks and the inventor lost faith in me (he is devoted to the idea of the crown at the toe as the mini shank is also the self righting mechanism).

I had thought if he focussed on a conventional shank in a conventional location and spent his time, somehow, adding the self righting mechanism he might then have something that 'worked' - and get a reward for his efforts.

He has dismissed me as, I'm not sure, a quack? I'm fully aware it cost him to send me a sample to test

Having added a shank and showing that if it could set, but not self right (I'm not keen on roll bars) I stopped being 'innovative' - or became innovative in other projects. I may pick up the ball as I have a rather spiffy fluke looking for a role in life. Vyv's post has pricked my conscience.

Jonathan

Apart from the obvious what does a Duckdo question, I thought a Quack was a Doctor????

 

[Neeves]

Jonathan (Neeves),
Whilst you are on line can I ask your view on a quick point if I may?
I will be replacing the anchor before next season for a trip up into the Arctic, I'm an 'old school' type so would probably stick to a Crosby or similar shackle (with Monel locking wire) between the anchor (probably a spade) and standard chain.
Before I finally commit - do you have any thoughts on more modern connectors and chain allowing for reliability as well as outright performance? Does an 'upgrade' to higher spec / lower weight chain mean a smaller diameter shackle pin and hence no gain?
Many thanks.

For conventionally sized chain Crosby remains the shackle of choice, but if you can access Peerless Blue pin G80 or Campbell Orange Pin, also G80 - they are just as good.

If you are using high tensile chain, so smaller chain than recommended then...

Look at Omega links, depends on the shape - can be called 'pear links' pr hammer locks. These devices come in metric sizes from 6mm to ...enormous and specification from (I don't know the lowest rating) upto G120. I have mine galvanised, along with the chains. Galvanising might be difficult for such a small item so

Find a source of one that fits, buy a few examples and as they corrode, discard and add a new one. This sounds drastic but the gal on the Crosby shackle really does not last long, its constantly being abraded. Omegas and hammerlocks in our environment are single use and the pin is secured with some form of hammer in device or pins. To release the pins you need a punch, easily and cheaply available.

If this leaves unanswered questions - ask. I can post pictures (which as far as I know are not controversial (but I have been wrong in the past).

So... conventional chain would be G30 or G40. A HT chain might be G70 (but the 'next' size down), the shackle is G80 and sized for the originally recommended chain (it then fits the anchor). If you source an Omega link or a Hammerlock which will fit the HT chain, say G70, it will accept the G80 shackle - this can be G100. The weak link is the still the chain, G70.

I have photos, but it will take me time to sort through and post - happy to do so.

We downsized from G30 8mm and used a G80 (others that I helped we moved upto G100) chain of the next size down - so 6mm. I used G80 omega links and/or hammerlocks - for others I went belt and braces G100 Omegas and had the whole rode galvanised at the same time. I had the chain tested for UTS. to ensure it was as strong as the chain it replaced. The Omegas stayed on the chain as enlarged links and we used 3/8th" G80 shackles, Crosby, Peerless or Campbell. The bow fits the anchor the pin fits the Omega.

Hope this helps - just post, query and I'll add pictures.

Part of the objective is to ensure the chain is the weak link. But you will need snubber(s) to replace the catenary you have lost by down sizing chain size. But if you use a decent snubber - it will enhance your ability to accept snatch loads.

Jonathan

 

[laika]

I made a spade anchor out of cardboard from the pattern on their website. Looked great but didn’t fit on my bow roller and frankly I wouldn’t trust it’s holding when wet.

 

[rogerthebodger]

I made a spade anchor out of cardboard from the pattern on their website. Looked great but didn’t fit on my bow roller and frankly I wouldn’t trust it’s holding when wet.

I made a pattern of my spade anchor from hardboard to ensure it fitted by bow roller with my other anchor.

I the transferred the shape to steel and they both fitted together

Final result

https://flic.kr/p/VKmMJX

 

[Blue Seas]

For conventionally sized chain Crosby remains the shackle of choice, but if you can access Peerless Blue pin G80 or Campbell Orange Pin, also G80 - they are just as good.

If you are using high tensile chain, so smaller chain than recommended then...

Look at Omega links, depends on the shape - can be called 'pear links' pr hammer locks. These devices come in metric sizes from 6mm to ...enormous and specification from (I don't know the lowest rating) upto G120. I have mine galvanised, along with the chains. Galvanising might be difficult for such a small item so

Find a source of one that fits, buy a few examples and as they corrode, discard and add a new one. This sounds drastic but the gal on the Crosby shackle really does not last long, its constantly being abraded. Omegas and hammerlocks in our environment are single use and the pin is secured with some form of hammer in device or pins. To release the pins you need a punch, easily and cheaply available.

If this leaves unanswered questions - ask. I can post pictures (which as far as I know are not controversial (but I have been wrong in the past).

So... conventional chain would be G30 or G40. A HT chain might be G70 (but the 'next' size down), the shackle is G80 and sized for the originally recommended chain (it then fits the anchor). If you source an Omega link or a Hammerlock which will fit the HT chain, say G70, it will accept the G80 shackle - this can be G100. The weak link is the still the chain, G70.

I have photos, but it will take me time to sort through and post - happy to do so.

We downsized from G30 8mm and used a G80 (others that I helped we moved upto G100) chain of the next size down - so 6mm. I used G80 omega links and/or hammerlocks - for others I went belt and braces G100 Omegas and had the whole rode galvanised at the same time. I had the chain tested for UTS. to ensure it was as strong as the chain it replaced. The Omegas stayed on the chain as enlarged links and we used 3/8th" G80 shackles, Crosby, Peerless or Campbell. The bow fits the anchor the pin fits the Omega.

Hope this helps - just post, query and I'll add pictures.

Part of the objective is to ensure the chain is the weak link. But you will need snubber(s) to replace the catenary you have lost by down sizing chain size. But if you use a decent snubber - it will enhance your ability to accept snatch loads.

Jonathan

That's fantastic Jonathan, very much appreciated. I like the look of the Omega link so I'll probably pair that with the new Spade (or whatever) and stay with a Crosby on the Delta just to compare. I also carry a Fortress FX-37 as a lunch hook and kedge so we should be good. Thanks again.

 

[Ray Purchase]

One that takes 3 men to clean.

 

[Neeves]

I saw this anchor a few months ago. I know nothing about it. Its 'interesting' - and as its never been mentioned, uncontroversial.

How important is your anchor to you? Free freight included

Jonathan

 

[AntarcticPilot]

I saw this anchor a few months ago. I know nothing about it. Its 'interesting' - and as its never been mentioned, uncontroversial.

How important is your anchor to you? Free freight included

Jonathan

If I've understood the web page, it releases automatically as soon as there's a strong pull! I can see how that's useful for a reef fisherman who might otherwise lose anchors or have to dive to release it, but for someone wanting a quiet night no matter what comes along, it seems less useful!

But that highlights the point that one person's ideal anchor may not be another's! This fulfils a need - an anchor that can be released easily if it gets trapped in rocks or whatever. But that doesn't match the requirement most of us have, which is that the anchor will remain secure no matter what the load. And others have pointed out that some anchor designs (e.g. Fortress or, dare I say it, CQR) have a tendency to become very deeply embedded and can be very difficult to recover (I've certainly pulled my CQR up with a big lump of mud round it, and I'm not a frequent anchorer!). And every anchor design has some drawbacks; even the latest, whizziest designs will encounter circumstances where their performance is compromised - or where the designed performance is not what is wanted. There is no "ideal anchor" - it entirely depends on what your criteria for judging an anchor are. Even the much-maligned folding grapnel has a place - if you want something that can be stowed in a small space and will suffice for holding a dinghy, or as a kedge, or on an irregular rocky bottom.

 

[Neeves]

Jonathan (Neeves),
Whilst you are on line can I ask your view on a quick point if I may?
I will be replacing the anchor before next season for a trip up into the Arctic, I'm an 'old school' type so would probably stick to a Crosby or similar shackle (with Monel locking wire) between the anchor (probably a spade) and standard chain.
Before I finally commit - do you have any thoughts on more modern connectors and chain allowing for reliability as well as outright performance? Does an 'upgrade' to higher spec / lower weight chain mean a smaller diameter shackle pin and hence no gain?
Many thanks.

As I'm sitting in my dugout, drinking red wine, I put the following together

This is our primary method of attachment. We use a 3/8th" shackle with the bow through the anchor slot. It is a G80 shackle and a 3/8th shackle has a WLL of 2t and a UTS of 10t or 12t, depends on the manufacturer. Crosby is relatively easily available in the UK, another option, I missed, is Yoke - they are Taiwanese (have some nice kit) have a G80 shackle - and have just opened an office in the UK. The other options are Campbell, owned by Apex Tools in the US and Peerless, owned by Crosby Kito, same Crosby (under their Blue Pin or Peerlift range). All of these 3/8th" shackles have a WLL of 2t. CMP under their Titan brand make a Black Pin shackle, ostensibly the same as that from Crosby et al - I'm uncomfortable - try and source from Crosby

The next link is an Omega link and the clevis pin is retained by the 2 little hammer in pins. The links are made precisely for metric chain and you cannot use a bigger chain, because it will not pass through the jaw of the omega and you cannot use smaller chain as the clevis pin is too big. The chain is metric 6mm. This specific Omega is from the Excel side (based in France) part of Van Beest (based in Belgium).

The shackle pin can be secured with mousing wire or Loctite. The clevis pin for the Omega usually needs to be gently hammered in, its a tight fit - and once in and used can be a devil to knock out (you may need to cut the link - though I've always managed). The little locking pins are over sized and crush as you hammer them in. They can sometimes be saved - I drill them out and use a cotter pin as replacement.

A 6mm G100 Omega link will have a WLL of 1.4t, well above the WLL of any chain you are likely to use. All lifting kit is to a standard specification - it does not matter who you source from all 6mm x G100 items, chain, omegas etc are to the same spec WLL of 1.4t. Pewag, Rud, Excel are good reputable brands - but there are many others. Lifting chain and the connectors are all made to a 4:1 safety factor. Lifting chain and connectors are usually supplied painted or powder coated. The paint is commonly very robust - if you can find a galvanised remove the paint with paint stripper and a wire brush - or buy a few items leave the paint intact (its tenacious) and then dump the item when it looks grotty - they are really not expensive.

You can buy cheaper, than Excel or Crosby - the Chinese have some excellent product, some better than European product - but its a lottery what you might get unless you sample a number of suppliers, sample again, buy, check what you bought etc - its easier if you buy from Crosby!

Crosby and Excel (Van Beest) can be easily sourced in the UK - I think Yoke might be worth a try - Peerless or Campbell much more difficult - unless you are based in or visit the US. I'm known to most of the major suppliers and I can buy almost ...anything they make - if you have an issue let me know. Tecni, I think based in Bristol, are good for Crosby, PM Zoidberg for contact for Gunnebo, also part of Crosby (omega links and hammerlocks). Gunnebo make a galvanised aquaculture G80 chain - except its Xmm + 10% - check the website and or ask Zoidberg. If you are using a windlass it might fit, or not . They must make galvanised connectors - but I have never seen them. Our chain was standard metric 6mm G80, from Gunnebo.

I use a shackle and Omega link as illustrated. However I also use, especially when testing simply a 6mm G80 or G100 hammer lock. It fits both the anchors, plural - different designs, and the chain.

Post or send me a PM for further help - I don't know what you don't know

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

That's fantastic Jonathan, very much appreciated. I like the look of the Omega link so I'll probably pair that with the new Spade (or whatever) and stay with a Crosby on the Delta just to compare. I also carry a Fortress FX-37 as a lunch hook and kedge so we should be good. Thanks again.

Just to clarify. You need a shackle and an Omega. The omega will fit the chain, if you have 8mm chain buy an 8mm Omega. Go as 'strong' as is available - prefer G100 over G80. The Omega will not fit the anchor, the shank is too thick but it will take the shackle pin. So you still need the shackle. Buy the punches from your DIY store - they are cheap. Just to re-assure - the gal on any shackle pin wears off quickly and then wears off the shackle itself a lot more slowly. You don't notice any corrosion on the shackle pin but it will be happening continuously - but it has never been an issue - I have never heard of a shackle pin on an anchor rode wearing out (though it might and does happen on a mooring). The steel used for shackles, and omega links has a high tensile strength and tensile strength and abrasion resistance are linear - high tensile strength, high abrasion resistance. So the Omega should last as long as the shackle and longer than the first few links of your chain.

What chain will you be using?

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

If I've understood the web page, it releases automatically as soon as there's a strong pull! I can see how that's useful for a reef fisherman who might otherwise lose anchors or have to dive to release it, but for someone wanting a quiet night no matter what comes along, it seems less useful!

But that highlights the point that one person's ideal anchor may not be another's! This fulfils a need - an anchor that can be released easily if it gets trapped in rocks or whatever. But that doesn't match the requirement most of us have, which is that the anchor will remain secure no matter what the load. And others have pointed out that some anchor designs (e.g. Fortress or, dare I say it, CQR) have a tendency to become very deeply embedded and can be very difficult to recover (I've certainly pulled my CQR up with a big lump of mud round it, and I'm not a frequent anchorer!). And every anchor design has some drawbacks; even the latest, whizziest designs will encounter circumstances where their performance is compromised - or where the designed performance is not what is wanted. There is no "ideal anchor" - it entirely depends on what your criteria for judging an anchor are. Even the much-maligned folding grapnel has a place - if you want something that can be stowed in a small space and will suffice for holding a dinghy, or as a kedge, or on an irregular rocky bottom.

But the thread is about worst anchors - one that looks magic, desperately complicated - and releases just when the chips are down - surely meets the requirement of a worst anchor

Oil rig anchors, or some of them - I have a video of a Bruce such anchor actually working, have a torque bolt - when you want to retreive you tension backwards, the bolt fails, the shank swings over to the direction of tension and you 'slide' the anchor out backwards. It would not do on 'our' anchors - but saves expensive bits of kit.

As I say - anchors are a compromise.

Jonathan