Which anchor for Croatia?

[Salty John]

Fantastic Catroon SJ, thanks for posting it.

However, I notice you've drawn a CQR. I think you'll find the Bruce is a far better anchor for humourous anchor sketches.

Ha! I don't know where you do your cartooning but I think you'll find that recent tests by the guild of humerous anchoring cartoonists showed that the Bruce was useless, just too damn difficult to draw. You'd be better with no anchor at all, really.

 

[jordanbasset]

Ha! I don't know where you do your cartooning but I think you'll find that recent tests by the guild of humerous anchoring cartoonists showed that the Bruce was useless, just too damn difficult to draw. You'd be better with no anchor at all, really.

What's the King Of Scotland got to do with anchor threads, keep it on track. Also think he was no harder to draw than Edward the Second. Although if we must compare Kings Richard the Third was easier to draw.

 

[vyv_cox]

Jordanbasset. The YM test you quote is the French one I referred to. I don't think I have ever come across another that was so critical of the Delta, which aroused my suspicions immediately. The Delta is always a solid middle - upper performer, which mirrors my own experience. A (French) test that finds the Kobra 2 to be excellent and the Delta to be rubbish has to be viewed with some suspicion.

I'm not knocking the Kobra 2 in the slightest but I don't think it is as versatile, or ultimately as powerful, as the new generation anchors.

If I didn't have an anchor I would put down even more chain. I view chain as the first line of defence and the anchor as the back up, not something to hang off.

Kelly's Eye - I believe, and have shown, that chain alone will not hold a boat in a force 3 wind. You say it will, so I look forward to reading the proof.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Oh dear, and this was becoming that most rare of things, a non-acrimonious anchor thread.

Yup, I thought about adding a rider to my original post asking for it not to degenerate into fisticuffs like most other anchor posts. In retrospect, maybe I should have

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Mike, I don't think you will fit a Manson supreme - but look at their website to check shank dimensions. Otherwise I think your best bet is the Spade which seems to fit everything, but expensive - but what price for a peaceful stress free night? I see a lot of Bugles here, and don't see them having problems.

I am shocked by the price of the Spade. £735 for a 30kg galvanised Spade compared to £374 for a galvanised 32kg Delta

Is the Spade worth twice the price?

 

[KellysEye]

>You must always be alone in remote anchorages then. Most often I am sharing an anchorage where swinging room is limited. I do try to keep to 5x depth but even that sometimes causes neighbour problems.

Not at all but most of our cruising was around experienced cruising sailors, some Med stuff but mainly Caribbean. Apart fron the French who haven't got a clue about anchoring* what I said is fairly standard practice so no real problems.

* they anchor right on top of you, often no more than 12 feet in front, on a short scope. They always drag, it's the only time we keep anchor watches all day and night if necessary. If we need things ashore only one of us goes but it usually doesn't last too long they drag quite quickly.

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Apart fron the French who haven't got a clue about anchoring* what I said is fairly standard practice so no real problems.

* they anchor right on top of you, often no more than 12 feet in front, on a short scope. They always drag, it's the only time we keep anchor watches all day and night if necessary. If we need things ashore only one of us goes but it usually doesn't last too long they drag quite quickly.

Yup, agree with that. They haven't got a clue. Not only that, when they anchor in front of you and drag on to your boat, they expect you to move Worse than that, they stand on their bathing platforms in broad daylight stark ******* naked urinating into the sea when your kids are swimming only yards away.
Don't you just love our Froggie neighbours? Probably not actually

 

[Mark-1]

Kelly's Eye - I believe, and have shown, that chain alone will not hold a boat in a force 3 wind. You say it will, so I look forward to reading the proof.

I think people have posted as much as they really can without making actual measurements. Can't we just all agree that our experiences differ and forget about it? I'd like to think we've all got better things to do than argue about how hard it is to pull chain over seabed!

Maybe just take a lunch stop somewhere with some sea room in a F3 & chuck all your ground tackle over. If at the end of lunch your anchor has set itself you know it's had a decent pull.

In constrast if it looks like this you'll know there was no weight on it:

 

[dougg]

Slightly off topic, but i dont want to start another "anchoring thread".
I consider that that the anchor swivel conection as the weekest part of the set up and quite hard to test its integrity( whilst living aboard )
Ive put an extra shackle on the anchor and another a foot up the chain loosely conected with some 8mm stainless wire.
My thoughts were that if the swivel gave way there would be some back up.
Any thoughts welcomed..

 

[Deleted User YDKXO]

Slightly off topic, but i dont want to start another "anchoring thread".
I consider that that the anchor swivel conection as the weekest part of the set up and quite hard to test its integrity( whilst living aboard )
Ive put an extra shackle on the anchor and another a foot up the chain loosely conected with some 8mm stainless wire.
My thoughts were that if the swivel gave way there would be some back up.
Any thoughts welcomed..

I think thats an excellent idea and similar to how mooring springs are constructed in the Med. I have used Kong type swivels for some years which are fine but I inspect them regularly and change them every 2-3 seasons. A few years ago I noticed that the forked ends of my Kong swivel had begun to splay outwards and that spooked me so I keep a regular eye on my swivel now.
How does your safety shackle arrangement affect launching and retrieving the anchor in the bow roller? Or do you fit the shackle arrangement as the anchor leaves the bow roller?

 

[Salty John]

If you eliminate the swivel you remove this potential source of failure. I just use a bow shackle with the pin through the anchor and the chain on the bow.

I know it's less sleek and can cause trouble with some anchor rollers, but if you haul anchor on the foredeck it's easily managed. For remote raising of the anchor, as many mobo'ers prefer to do, it can be a problem.

 

[KellysEye]

>If you eliminate the swivel you remove this potential source of failure.

Agree. We saw two charter boats in Greece on the rocks early one morning. The wind had picked up dramatically during the night, both had failed swivels. I don't see why folks use swivels, the pawl on the winch takes any twists out the chain.

 

[dougg]

So whats the consensus of opinion re the swivel? it would be good to do away with it all together. Is its primary use to aid getting the anchor into the bow roller or for helping the anchor set?

On my arrangement the wire strop sits on top of the chain, as the anchor docks itself it is of no hinderence. I must say it helps me sleep better.

 

[Jeva]

This discussion about the swivel takes us right back to the begining:-
'in most cases the anchor is the last resort and the boat should be lying to the weight of the anchor chain' - If the swivel is under that much strain, then more chain needs to be laid.http://www.ybw.com/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

 

[noelex]

This discussion about the swivel takes us right back to the begining:-
'in most cases the anchor is the last resort and the boat should be lying to the weight of the anchor chain' - If the swivel is under that much strain, then more chain needs to be laid.http://www.ybw.com/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Scope beyond about 10 or 12:1 will make almost no difference to the anchors holding ability. In strong wind the chain will lift off the bottom there is nothing you can do about this. Its very easy to prove just snorkel over and have a look.

 

[KellysEye]

>Scope beyond about 10 or 12:1 will make almost no difference to the anchors holding ability. In strong wind the chain will lift off the bottom there is nothing you can do about this. Its very easy to prove just snorkel over and have a look.


You can keep the chain on the bottom if you have enough chain, hurricanes excepted. We carry 300 feet of chain enough for most conditions. For extreme conditions we carry two extra anchors and two lots of: 100 feet of chain each of which is shackled to two hundred feet of rope. We've never had to use more than two anchors.

 

[vyv_cox]

See http://www.petersmith.net.nz/boat-anchors/catenary.php for an excellent discussion of the practical and theoretical issues involved, backed up by experience in the windiest places on earth.

"Further, it should be recognized that adequate scope is very important in strong conditions. While catenary disappears, geometry cannot be argued with; for a constant depth, a longer rode means a lower maximum possible angle of pull on the anchor. A ratio of about 3:1 should be considered minimal, and adequate only for light to moderate conditions. Generally speaking about 5:1 is a good ratio to aim for. In worse conditions, the scope should be maximized, up to a ratio of around 8:1 – there is little benefit in higher ratios."

 

[noelex]

You can keep the chain on the bottom if you have enough chain, hurricanes excepted. We carry 300 feet of chain enough for most conditions. For extreme conditions we carry two extra anchors and two lots of: 100 feet of chain each of which is shackled to two hundred feet of rope. We've never had to use more than two anchors.

A 100m of chain is fairly common for cruising boats and it does not stop the chain lifting off the bottom in strong winds.
To anchor successfully in strong winds your anchor must set well in the substrate, its what holding your boat, not the chain

 

[Mark-1]

Scope beyond about 10 or 12:1 will make almost no difference to the anchors holding ability. In strong wind the chain will lift off the bottom there is nothing you can do about this.

So the effort required to drag chain is not proportional to the length of the chain beyond 10m scope? Therefore 10:1 plus ten miles of chain and 10:1 plus 5m of chain both would require almost the same force to drag them?

If you were racing in shallow water and you threw 60m of chain over the back with no anchor would you expect it to slow you a great deal or not much?

Its very easy to prove just snorkel over and have a look.

Everyone in this thread will have done that over and over again so, as I say above, there seems little point is debating it. None of us are going to change our mind about what we see for ourselves all the time.

The only way to sort this out objectively is for someone to measure the force required to pull all their chain along the sea bed and then measure the pull of their boat due to windage in a F3. I doubt anyone will bother.

Again to me this seems obvious, there's no way I could pull 50-60m of chain along the sea floor or ground hand over hand, yet I can easily pull a boat towards its anchor or mooring bouy in a F3.

 

[vyv_cox]

Again to me this seems obvious, there's no way I could pull 50-60m of chain along the sea floor or ground hand over hand, yet I can easily pull a boat towards its anchor or mooring bouy in a F3.

Well, I wouldn't call myself particularly well-endowed with strength, but I can easily drag 60 metres of 8 mm chain in a straight line along the ground in air, not water. Pulling it in a curve with one end fixed is a different matter, which is the source of the confusion in the thread. Removing the fixture then allows the chain to follow along the curve, rather than trying to slide sideways. Hence the function of the anchor in light to moderate winds.

I suggest again, try it for yourself. Drop your chain after removing the anchor in a force 3. I guarantee that it will drag, because I have tried it, unlike those who make pronouncements based on their flawed logic.