Anchor Depth/performance Reversals

[Nomad Willy]

There was a thread whereas a member had a rode reversal experience w a Manson Supreme and after the reversal the Supreme didn’t re-set.

Been thinking about that and have come up w a good possible reason it happened. The Supreme has an almost bullit proof rep so I did some wondering.

I haven’t used my Supreme much especially in the un-modified state but in tests across the board it’s been a very near top performer. But anchor tests mostly test holding power.

I thought about the many times people on TF have complained about lots of mud and weed on the anchors upon retrieval. I almost never have any mud and no weed at all. That’s been floating about in my mind for a few years and now I have thought of a good reason for the weed. It’s related to depth, water clarity and sunlight.

Steve G’s Anchor Setting Vids (ASV’s) were carried out anchoring in 25-30’ of water. I suddenly occured to me that I rarely set an anchor that shallow. With 18+ foot tides in Alaska the above is nearly impossible. So most of my anchoring has been at 35-40’ and often deeper. Saw many pics of “salad” on Steve’s anchors during the ASV’s that I’m thinking where reversals are likely one should anchor deeper to avoid most of the weedy bottoms that have a tendency to render good anchors worthless especially on reversals.

Also remember that when Steve drilled the holes in the Supreme’s fluke the problem evaporated. He said he just couldn’t make the holed Supreme fail. Back and forth many times he went. Well other manufactures can’t drill the holes we but we boat owners can. Soon I’ll try my little 12lb modified Supreme and if I get the chance before we head north to QC Strait I’ll try a few shallow sets and some deeper sets in the same area that Steve used and report.

 

[Shrew]

There are two camps I find in most posts. Those who actively set their anchor, and those that let momentum, wind and current set the anchor. Personally, I back down on the anchor until it's set, then rev up to 1,000 rpm to ensure it's buried.

I would be curious the method employed by the person who dragged after a reversal. I would venture a guess that those who use momentum might not actually be setting their anchor. When a reversal occurs, there is a higher chance of the anchor not properly setting.

I've reversed and sat in 35 kt winds 180 degress from the direction of set with no issues. When I dove on the anchor, it was so well buried, the anchor didn't even reverse direction. In other words, I was pulling backward on the anchor in 35 kt winds.

Sometimes I have a difficult time breaking the anchor free at 0 scope.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Shrew,
As far as I know that’s the first time that’s been mentioned on TF. I’ve thought of it. Steve G did many reversals in a seafloor
not terribly compacted and don’t recall backwards anchor holding his boat. But most of the time we anchor in benign conditions and probably much of the time we’ve remained anchored wan anchor set bassawkwards.

Interesting thoughts and I’m glad you mentioned it. Has something to do w my next anchor post and for a moment I thought you were posting in the wrong thread. HaHa
Much of the time though re your post, anchors rotate w the shank mostly above the seafloor and the fluke buried. Frequently 180 degrees of even more. Even Danforths can do that depending on the bottom. Seen it also in Practical Sailor Anchor Tests. It’s common (I believe) but we usually have no idea if the anchor broke out and re-set or what as we can only guess what is truly going on down there.

It’s been a very long time for me to experience dificulty weighing anchor. But frequently I tie off and loosen up the anchor. But difficulty .. no. I do worry about snagging a cable ect and loosing gear. Never happened to me though even in the much logged PNW.

But my thread here was directed twoards anchoring deep (a bit) to evade getting one’s anchor fowled and rendered useless w weed. My thinking was just by just going a little this way or that may get our anchor deep enough to avoid most of the things that grow on the seafloor. Just a little feather in one’s cap that may save the day for those often anchoring shallow bottoms where reversing winds and current prevail.

 

[O C Diver]

Let me start out by saying, I have a Rocna.

With the exception of test simulations at 4 knots with short scope, Rocnas and probably most modern anchor designs, pivot in place or only move a short distance before resetting. The reality of the situation is that in all but the rarest of circumstances, anchor reversals don't happen at 4 knots, usually less than 1 knot. Secondly, if you use proper scope, 7:1 ( haven't seen an anchor manufacturer endorse less), the anchor will have the ideal penetration angle to reset. Now there may be some places in the PNW where they anchor in 100'+ of water and 7:1 isn't practical, but most everywhere else it's doable.

IMO, most anchoring failures could have been prevented with 7:1 scope. Really don't understand why people feel the need to short scope. Hi, my name is Ted, I anchor with 7:1 scope, and sleep very well when on the hook.

Ted

 

[psneeld]

I have had no dragging issues with multiple reversals and wind shearing up to 35 knots also on my Manson Supreme 60 pounder....all 5/16 chain.

Usually on 5 to 1 scope unless staying multiple days or higher winds/currents.

If expecting wind over 20 knors or currents in excess of 2 knots I back down too, if less than that....I dont worry and just let it set itself.

 

[DDW]

Now there may be some places in the PNW where they anchor in 100'+ of water and 7:1 isn't practical, but most everywhere else it's doable.

There are plenty of places in the PNW where you are anchored in 30', but 7:1 isn't practical as you will use the whole anchorage and there are 10 other boats in there. 7:1 in 30' depth takes about an acre of real estate.

 

[O C Diver]

There are plenty of places in the PNW where you are anchored in 30', but 7:1 isn't practical as you will use the whole anchorage and there are 10 other boats in there. 7:1 in 30' depth takes about an acre of real estate.

7:1 in 30' of water takes about a 300' radius from the anchor. Don't really want anyone closer than 300'. All kidding aside, I'm not anchoring with 10 other boats on 4:1 scope. It just seems a recipe for disaster.


Ted

 

[caltexflanc]

I'll post this for the umpteenth time. You will learn a lot about real world anchor behavior by observing your boat's movement directly, and mapping it on your plotter to inform that observation.

In this example, 25 ft water, mud bottom chain rode at a little over 3/1 scope, Delta anchor. Multiple days at same spot. Note how the boat pretty much lays to the chain when being pushed around by the tidal current clocking.Then a brief squall and comes out full length. Squall passes and back to normal. When weighed, about 20-30 ft of chain encased in mud, anchor encased shank and all.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Ted wrote;
“Secondly, if you use proper scope, 7:1 ( haven't seen an anchor manufacturer endorse less),”

Ted,
And what are anchor manufacturer’s motivation for getting it right? Sales and staying out of financial trouble. They don’t want to make any recomendations that there’s even a slight posibility of them proving wrong and their recomendations showing up in court. I know my anchors perform well at 3-1 and 4 or 5-1 for storms. But if I was selling anchors I recomend 7-1 too.

And why did you start out telling us you use a Rocna? This thread tried to have nothing to do with brands.

 

[O C Diver]

Ted wrote;
“Secondly, if you use proper scope, 7:1 ( haven't seen an anchor manufacturer endorse less),”

Ted,
And what are anchor manufacturer’s motivation for getting it right? Sales and staying out of financial trouble. They don’t want to make any recomendations that there’s even a slight posibility of them proving wrong and their recomendations showing up in court. I know my anchors perform well at 3-1 and 4 or 5-1 for storms. But if I was selling anchors I recomend 7-1 too.

And why did you start out telling us you use a Rocna? This thread tried to have nothing to do with brands.

Eric,
Have you ever read Chapman's?

https://www.amazon.com/Chapman-Piloting-Seamanship-Handling-SEAMANSHIP/dp/0688148921

Pretty much the bible of small boat seamanship for generations. 7:1 scope has been the standard until you get into storm conditions. I agree with you, If you're an anchor manufacturer, why would you want to say anything about the required amount of scope and then find yourself in court defending it when somebody breaks lose putting their boat on the rocks.

The part I've never understood was why use less than the standard if you have the swing room? Why would you live on the edge at 3:1? It's certainly not safer. Or is this about bragging rights?

I mentioned Rocna and the other modern design anchors as the market seems to have embraced them in spite of their premium price and they as a group generally fair much better in reversals.

Ted

 

[Nomad Willy]

HaHa Ted you’re right about modern anchors but I’d never admit that to Marin Fare. He and his Rocna were a religious affair.

In SE Alaska’s little rock lined pocket anchorages 3-1 and even 2-1 is the norm. Many say they don’t anchor at 3-1 but I think they do. Almost always I don’t use 2-1 when I have more room. But after years of short scope anchoring one tends to belive in it. Look at Steve’s vids but as he says use longer scope for winds. Personally I rarely go above 5-1. Did a 50 knot gale at 5-1. That was my storm anchor though. But “living on the edge”? I’ll decide where the edge is. I do like Chapman and often quote their chain requirements.

 

[O C Diver]

I'll post this for the umpteenth time. You will learn a lot about real world anchor behavior by observing your boat's movement directly, and mapping it on your plotter to inform that observation.

In this example, 25 ft water, mud bottom chain rode at a little over 3/1 scope, Delta anchor. Multiple days at same spot. Note how the boat pretty much lays to the chain when being pushed around by the tidal current clocking.Then a brief squall and comes out full length. Squall passes and back to normal. When weighed, about 20-30 ft of chain encased in mud, anchor encased shank and all.

Quite the dare devil you are. Glad you got away with it. What I've never understood is the resistance to putting down another 100' of chain and going from 3:1 to 7:1. Would pulling up and cleaning that extra hundred feet take more than 5 to 10 minutes?

Ted

 

[Ken E.]

I'm with Eric. It's rare that I use more than 3:1, only in blustery conditions. 3/8" all chain rode, 66 lb claw. This has been my MO for many years in Alaska and PNW and it has worked well.

 

[FF]

We mostly set a Bahamas more , second anchor astern lead to the bow.

Never a problem in a wind shift , the boat does not require acres to anchor , and only a 5 min exercise to perform.

Works well in tidal areas or reversing rivers too.

 

[jleonard]

8 to 10:1 for me most of the time. All chain 35 Danforth in mud bottoms here in eastern LI Sound.
I let the drift initially set then I back down at 1000 rpm or so. I often have difficulty weighing anchor and a lot of mud to clean off the chain and I like it that way.

 

[caltexflanc]

Quite the dare devil you are. Glad you got away with it. What I've never understood is the resistance to putting down another 100' of chain and going from 3:1 to 7:1. Would pulling up and cleaning that extra hundred feet take more than 5 to 10 minutes?

Ted

Because that worked dozens of times in that sort of bottom and in much worse conditions. In sketchy places you bet I'm deploying all I can.
And it takes a heck of a lot longer to retrieve and wash than 5 minutes.

 

[DDW]

Quite the dare devil you are. Glad you got away with it. What I've never understood is the resistance to putting down another 100' of chain and going from 3:1 to 7:1. Would pulling up and cleaning that extra hundred feet take more than 5 to 10 minutes?

Ted

That won't make you very popular in many anchorages. I see you are in Florida where the water isn't very thick. Elsewhere is different.

I'll admit that the chain in the locker isn't going to do you any good - but may not do harm either. There is some science in this after all. Once the rode is pulling horizontally at peak load (that being the load that causes the anchor to move, or boat to stay) then additional scope does no good at all. The scope required to achieve this (on an all chain rode) is 7:1 only at shallow depths for typical holding. In very deep water it can be 2:1. Modern anchors actually hold pretty well on shorter scope than the horizontal criteria.

Now if you are laying to an old style anchor and/or on nylon, then a lot of scope might help. Still won't make you popular though. 7:1 in 30 feet means you are swinging a 570 ft circle on a 40' boat. That can be the whole anchorage in a lot of places, nearly two football fields. (30' depth + 5' up to bow roller * 7 = 245' + 40 feet of boat * 2).

I've gotten away with 5:1 and less in probably 500 attempts all around the continent. All chain on a Spade. I've also anchored in 100'. Didn't have 700' of chain. Sure if I'm anchored in 12', 7:1 doesn't like too much chain.

 

[dhays]

I usually try to put out 5:1. However, I often find that I get funny looks from folks that are perfectly happy and secure at 3:1.

If I am anchoring in 30’ of water and am expecting a 10’ tide increase and my bow roller is 5’ above the water. I prefer to lay out 225’ of chain. However, if I am in a small anchorage with a bunch of boats that have 100’ of chain out, it won’t be pretty.

Some of us anchor in anchorages where there are a number of other boats, in a small cove where we don’t have much swing room between rocks, or anchor in deeper water. I’ve used all 300’ of chain a few times and barely had 3:1 scope.

A lot easier to get 7:1 scope if you are anchoring in 7’ of water, little tide, and a 5’ freeboard. Particularly if you are fortunate enough to be able to be all by yourself.

Edit: Looks like DDW already made my point a few minutes earlier.

 

[Nomad Willy]

OK so none have any opinions or experience w how seaweed/salad effects the performance of anchors on reversals?
My notion of anchoring a bit deeper to avoid weed isn’t valid?

 

[O C Diver]

That won't make you very popular in many anchorages. I see you are in Florida where the water isn't very thick. Elsewhere is different.

I'll admit that the chain in the locker isn't going to do you any good - but may not do harm either. There is some science in this after all. Once the rode is pulling horizontally at peak load (that being the load that causes the anchor to move, or boat to stay) then additional scope does no good at all. The scope required to achieve this (on an all chain rode) is 7:1 only at shallow depths for typical holding. In very deep water it can be 2:1. Modern anchors actually hold pretty well on shorter scope than the horizontal criteria.

Now if you are laying to an old style anchor and/or on nylon, then a lot of scope might help. Still won't make you popular though. 7:1 in 30 feet means you are swinging a 570 ft circle on a 40' boat. That can be the whole anchorage in a lot of places, nearly two football fields. (30' depth + 5' up to bow roller * 7 = 245' + 40 feet of boat * 2).

I've gotten away with 5:1 and less in probably 500 attempts all around the continent. All chain on a Spade. I've also anchored in 100'. Didn't have 700' of chain. Sure if I'm anchored in 12', 7:1 doesn't like too much chain.

Never worried about being popular. Mom would tie a pork chop bone around my neck so that the dog would play with me. Nowadays I just keep beer and pork tenderloins in the fridge.

While I do live in FL and MD, cruising bank and forth on the AICW, I also did the Great Loop last year. So I've seen anchoring depths to 40'. Not going to claim any experience anchoring in 100' and maybe 3:1 is all that's required. However, anchoring in 7' of water with 21' of chain is just plain foolish.

Probably 95% of my anchoring is in 10' or less. 7:1 has never disappointed me. I don't infringe on other anchored boats and expect the same out of those arriving after me. 7:1 in 20' gives me a 120' radius including the boat. 120' separation makes for good neighbors. I've probably seen 8 or 10 boats that broke free or failed the reversal either in tidal currents or a squall. Bet they were all confident in their short scoping, except for that one time.

Ted

 

[caltexflanc]

Kelp is awful to anchor in. If nothing else, at best, it is hell on bringing the anchor up and cleaning the chain. Had this experience both in Drake's Bay and in Eagle Harbor off Cypress Island in the San Juans. Out east, kelp is virtually a non-issue.

 

[caltexflanc]

Never worried about being popular. Mom would tie a pork chop bone around my neck so that the dog would play with me. Nowadays I just keep beer and pork tenderloins in the fridge.

While I do live in FL and MD, cruising bank and forth on the AICW, I also did the Great Loop last year. So I've seen anchoring depths to 40'. Not going to claim any experience anchoring in 100' and maybe 3:1 is all that's required. However, anchoring in 7' of water with 21' of chain is just plain foolish.

Probably 95% of my anchoring is in 20' or less. 7:1 has never disappointed me. I don't infringe on other anchored boats and expect the same out of those arriving after me. 7:1 in 20' gives me a 200' radius including the boat. 200' separation makes for good neighbors. I've probably seen 8 or 10 boats that broke free or failed the reversal either in tidal currents or a squall. Bet they were all confident in their short scoping, except for that one time.

Ted

It depends on the bottom (primarily), the weather and the anchorage dude. Huge generalizations are dangerous in this game.

 

[O C Diver]

It depends on the bottom (primarily), the weather and the anchorage dude. Huge generalizations are dangerous in this game.

Have yet to be in a situation where more scope wasn't better for my boat.

If the anchor doesn't break free, then it's a moot point. If the anchor is sliding across the bottom, I want the 10' of chain in front of it on the bottom also. Explain the downside of that to me.

Ted

 

[Nomad Willy]

Ted,
Been anchoring at short scope for years and never even dragged. However only a low percentage of those anchorings were w significant wind.

Most people think of Alaska as a fearful place where everything is extreme. Well I haven’t had a 50knot anchoring in Wash state or southern BC but I expect I’ll experience more 30-40 knot “breezes”. So perhaps I’ll go to 4-1. But in BC and Alaska in the summer I’ve experienced mostly calm anchorings.

But I’m not going to be convinced I’m gonna die if I don’t anchor at 7-1.

 

[O C Diver]

Ted,
Been anchoring at short scope for years and never even dragged. However only a low percentage of those anchorings were w significant wind.

Most people think of Alaska as a fearful place where everything is extreme. Well I haven’t had a 50knot anchoring in Wash state or southern BC but I expect I’ll experience more 30-40 knot “breezes”. So perhaps I’ll go to 4-1. But in BC and Alaska in the summer I’ve experienced mostly calm anchorings.

But I’m not going to be convinced I’m gonna die if I don’t anchor at 7-1.

Eric, I'm not trying to change anyone's mind. I also recognize that you're probably anchoring much deeper than I am.

But then one does have to wonder why you spend so much time trying to come up with a better anchor.

Ted

 

[dhays]

As for anchor reversals, inadequate scope, and not power setting, some of you may recall this thread from last year that I started.



http://www.trawlerforum.com/forums/s6/well-unfortunate-32656.html


My anchor grabbed and continually reset at the current kept reversing direction. At one point I had to shorten my scope since the wind kept blowing me towards shore every time the current reversed.

 

[SailorGreg]

There are two camps I find in most posts. Those who actively set their anchor, and those that let momentum, wind and current set the anchor. Personally, I back down on the anchor until it's set, then rev up to 1,000 rpm to ensure it's buried.

I would be curious the method employed by the person who dragged after a reversal. I would venture a guess that those who use momentum might not actually be setting their anchor. When a reversal occurs, there is a higher chance of the anchor not properly setting.

I've reversed and sat in 35 kt winds 180 degress from the direction of set with no issues. When I dove on the anchor, it was so well buried, the anchor didn't even reverse direction. In other words, I was pulling backward on the anchor in 35 kt winds.

Sometimes I have a difficult time breaking the anchor free at 0 scope.

Tried to stay out of this, but just can’t resist. Let me start by saying this applies to the Bahamas, where we spend our winters. So, to all of those who think that letting the boat drift back to set the anchor will work in the Bahamas, please don’t anchor near me. As a gross generalization, the Bahamas has two types of bottoms, deep sand that will hold no matter how you anchor ( most of the Exumas) and thin sand over hard pack ( Black Point, most of Eleuthera, etc.)
We back down at 1000 rpm. What often happens in thin sand anchorages is the anchor will hold at 700 rpm, then pop out at 900 or so (55k Vulcan). I have gone in the water while my wife goes through the setting process. In thin sand the tip hooks on whatever, maybe 6” deep. Then when she backs down it pops out and drags. If we stick around and keep trying we sooner or later get a good set. Then we watch as the neighborhood goes to hell. Boats come in, use the “ let the wind set the anchor” routine, and start mixing their drinks. If they don’t threaten us, we pour a drink as well and get ready for the arrival of the squall that is sure to come.
When the wind picks up, equivalent pull to my 900 rpm backing down routine, the “ let the wind set my anchor” crowd wanders off towards the reefs. (If I may digress for a minute, this is classic Block Island entertainment as well)
So my comment to the “ let the wind set my anchor” skippers. If you have been getting away with this routine then you are lucky or anchor in an area where this works, maybe Chesapeake mud, but it is not a technique that will serve you well in the long run. You will never know if the anchor will hold in that next squall unless you try.
I have goon this far, so might as well comment on the scope issue. As to the Bahamas, once set I think 5:1 is plenty for anything less than a major front. I have dove on the anchor many times and at 7:1 and gusting 30 knots the chain never lifts off the sand for the last 20’ or so. Tells me I have more scope than I need. Same goes for Chesapeake mud. At 7:1, while retrieving the anchor after a wind reversal, it is apparent that the reversal never got to the anchor, in fact never got to the last 20’ of chain. So, for most conditions, 20 knots or less, my baseline is 5:1.
What our scope discussion is missing is wind and current conditions ( knowable facts) and the actual set conditions( often unknowable unless you can dive the anchor). So 3:1 may work well with 300’ of chain out in light winds and with the anchor embedded in the rocks, but will be totally ineffective in the Bahamas in 15’ of water and sand over hard pack. The challenge is knowing which is which. And if you can’t dive on the anchor, then plan for the worst.
If I get to an anchorage and 3:1 is all that will fit, I leave. If I get there first and have 5:1 because that’s what I feel I need to be able to sleep, I am not going to shorten scope to accommodate the next arrival.
And if the next arrival is a “drop the anchor and drift back” type, I leave. I probably shouldn’t hit send, but after a glass of wine, what the heck.

 

[caltexflanc]

Tried to stay out of this, but just can’t resist. Let me start by saying this applies to the Bahamas, where we spend our winters. So, to all of those who think that letting the boat drift back to set the anchor will work in the Bahamas, please don’t anchor near me. As a gross generalization, the Bahamas has two types of bottoms, deep sand that will hold no matter how you anchor ( most of the Exumas) and thin sand over hard pack ( Black Point, most of Eleuthera, etc.)
We back down at 1000 rpm. What often happens in thin sand anchorages is the anchor will hold at 700 rpm, then pop out at 900 or so (55k Vulcan). I have gone in the water while my wife goes through the setting process. In thin sand the tip hooks on whatever, maybe 6” deep. Then when she backs down it pops out and drags. If we stick around and keep trying we sooner or later get a good set. Then we watch as the neighborhood goes to hell. Boats come in, use the “ let the wind set the anchor” routine, and start mixing their drinks. If they don’t threaten us, we pour a drink as well and get ready for the arrival of the squall that is sure to come.
When the wind picks up, equivalent pull to my 900 rpm backing down routine, the “ let the wind set my anchor” crowd wanders off towards the reefs. (If I may digress for a minute, this is classic Block Island entertainment as well)
So my comment to the “ let the wind set my anchor” skippers. If you have been getting away with this routine then you are lucky or anchor in an area where this works, maybe Chesapeake mud, but it is not a technique that will serve you well in the long run. You will never know if the anchor will hold in that next squall unless you try.
I have goon this far, so might as well comment on the scope issue. As to the Bahamas, once set I think 5:1 is plenty for anything less than a major front. I have dove on the anchor many times and at 7:1 and gusting 30 knots the chain never lifts off the sand for the last 20’ or so. Tells me I have more scope than I need. Same goes for Chesapeake mud. At 7:1, while retrieving the anchor after a wind reversal, it is apparent that the reversal never got to the anchor, in fact never got to the last 20’ of chain. So, for most conditions, 20 knots or less, my baseline is 5:1.
What our scope discussion is missing is wind and current conditions ( knowable facts) and the actual set conditions( often unknowable unless you can dive the anchor). So 3:1 may work well with 300’ of chain out in light winds and with the anchor embedded in the rocks, but will be totally ineffective in the Bahamas in 15’ of water and sand over hard pack. The challenge is knowing which is which. And if you can’t dive on the anchor, then plan for the worst.
If I get to an anchorage and 3:1 is all that will fit, I leave. If I get there first and have 5:1 because that’s what I feel I need to be able to sleep, I am not going to shorten scope to accommodate the next arrival.
And if the next arrival is a “drop the anchor and drift back” type, I leave. I probably shouldn’t hit send, but after a glass of wine, what the heck.

Good post. Or as the opening scene of The Music Man put it" "You gotta know the territory!"

 

[Nomad Willy]

Ted wrote;
“But then one does have to wonder why you spend so much time trying to come up with a better anchor.”

HAHA ... a point.
I just like tinkering w things and making them better. Did a bit of that flying ultralights also.
I got into the anchor game trying to find one that performed better than average at short scope after we moved to Alaska. Deep and small anchorages.
My first was the original XYZ. 13lbs. Great for hand pulling and this anchor won against all comers (most of all the hot anchors of the day) but I only occasionally got it to set.
Didn’t modify the that anchor and bought a Manson Supreme. Been modifying anchors ever since.
I don’t expect great things re my modified Claw but it still could be an improvement. Probably be the greatest mud scoop ever. ???
My XYZ (latest model) will probably work well. Before the latest mod it held our boat in a 50+ knot gale the likes of wich I hope I never see again.
The last modded anchor is the highly modified Supreme. Started life at 18lbs and all of my cutting, grinding and drilling has reduced it to 12lbs. Setting is in question but once set it should penetrate deeply and hold well.

If I was to buy a new anchor now it likely would be a Manson Boss. I’d consider the Vulcan but that’s the company that delivered mild steel shanks and I’m not sold on ballast. And their other anchor (Rocna) has been identified (two comprehensive anchor tests) as having relatively weak short scope performance. I like the Super Sarca very much but would like to see how a smallish SS would work w my present ground tackle. I suspect it would.

But I’m not ready to stop experimenting.
Soon I may be ready to switch to chain though depending on how well my shoulder works re it’s fairly recent rotater cuff operation. If that dosn’t go well I most likely will go 1/4” chain and pick an anchor. Stay tuned.

But Ted I’m experimenting because it’s interesting.

 

[DDW]

However, anchoring in 7' of water with 21' of chain is just plain foolish.

Probably 95% of my anchoring is in 10' or less. 7:1 has never disappointed me. I don't infringe on other anchored boats and expect the same out of those arriving after me. 7:1 in 20' gives me a 120' radius including the boat. 120' separation makes for good neighbors. I've probably seen 8 or 10 boats that broke free or failed the reversal either in tidal currents or a squall. Bet they were all confident in their short scoping, except for that one time.

Ted

I'll buy all that. In 7' of water, 3:1 should actually be more like 36' of chain (7' + 5' freeboard * 3). And as I said, you need more scope with that little chain to keep it on the bottom, at the same time you aren't using up much room. I haven't anchored much in 7' with the sailboat - it draws 6.5' . With this new trawler drawing 3.3', I'll be trying that.

I agree on the Bahamas - and in the sand over hard pack stuff scope really isn't the answer. You just need to keep an anchor watch or find a different bottom. Also in the Bahamas (perhaps especially the Exumas) anchor reversals happen, and can be fairly abrupt. Both from tides, and wind against tide, and just a sudden shift in wind. A lot less often on the East Coast or in the PNW.

On salad, a lot of that depends on the anchor. Some anchors are notorious for picking up weed and being fouled by it, others more resistant. Heavy kelp can foul just about anything.