Choosing the Right Anchor for Your Trawler

[Tidahapah]

Eric,
Have to agree with you.
When I drop anchor I start a slow astern movement as the anchor sits on the bottom.
Lay out the required chain and then give it a good set, if necessary will walk some chain back on if space is a little restricted. It is good to know the pick is set properly before finnished with engines.
My 2 c worth

Benn

 

[Nomad Willy]

Ben,Yeah I do the much the same except I lay the rode dowm as wer'e making stern way and then w about 5 to 8-1 scope I set it w about 1/3 to 1/2 throttle. Then pull up to about 3-1 scope for normal weather. I like your new Excel and I notice it has a shackle hole in the same place Peter what's his face says is for tandem anchoring. Has it been claimed for that purpose by SARCA? My anchor (Supreme) by the same manufacturer provides no such hole but then I'm not planing on mak'in an anchor train w that one anyway.
Peter,
My days of not setting the anchor was a long time ago (60s and early 70s). I had light boats, used Danforth type anchors and don't recall anchoring in any big blows. I also stayed put every time and used some but very little chain. Have you ever used the back end of the slot as a act of necessity when you could'nt lift the anchor from the end of the shank? Perhaps you wouldn't know which end of the shank the shackle was on?


Eric

 

[Tidahapah]

Eric,
They don't claim it as a tandem anchor point and I wouldn't use it as such.
I would more likely attach the tandem from the cross bar between the flukes as it is closer to the horizontal plane of the anchor and by the way winter has set in here minimum of7 deg and only reaching 20 for the max Deg C Brrrrrrrrrr (44 to 68 F)

Benn

 

[Peter B]

"Have you ever used the back end of the slot as a act of necessity when you could'nt lift the anchor from the end of the shank? Perhaps you wouldn't know which end of the shank the shackle was on?
Eric"

Yes, Eric, once when anchored in a short offshoot of the Brisbane River, called the Aquarium Passage, which is an old trawler port and near an industrial area, and a lot of debris has accumulated over the years. We could not haul up until I did the deliberate tripping trick using the slot, and even then when she came up, there was a roll of old wire, an old tyre and the remains of a discarded sail hanging on it. God only knows what the fluke was tucked under before we tripped it.
I agree by and large with comments re anchoring over unfamiliar bottom, a tug to check it is wise, my comments re not really being necessary with these anchors relate to known bottoms where one has gone before. But we are creatures of habit, are we not.....so I don't imagine Benn will ever not do his check in reverse, and nor will you Eric, because it makes you feel better...right? Just bear in mind, that when the tide/wind/whatever swings through 180 degrees, and the anchor is forced to pop out and reset, you are not doing this "checking thing", and that's when the amazing quick and reliable re-setting feature of these anchors pays huge dividends.
An interesting thing occurred just last weekend illustrating the effects of different bottoms, however. We anchored off Coochiemudlo Island, my brother being with us who loves to fish. I therefore chose to anchor nearer a rocky point than usual to get nearer the fish - that's where all the 'tinnies' with the good keen fishers were, you see. He caught 12 lovely young snapper, unfortunately all just under the 35 cm size, so they went back - but he had fun. It was such a nice spot tho, we decided to stay put overnight. Thankfully no wind came up or we might have been forced to move a bit, because in the night, when we turned and moved a bit with the tide, there was this incredible rumbling sound. I checked landmarks and we were not moving, but just the chain dragging over the bottom was revealing we were over a solid rock bottom. The Sarca was holding, (Sand And Rock Combination Anchor, remember), but it sure made for an interesting sound, and the occasional wake-up call, until reassured.
Oh, and small point of order, Manson Supreme not made by same manufacturer as Sarca. Totally different company, one NZ (Manson) the other, Sarca, Australian.

 

[Nomad Willy]

A bit of an update here for those that find anchoring important or interesting.I anchored w my new Manson Supreme (tried) in a small anchorage on POW Is called Lyman Anchorage. I used an all line rode at about 2.5 to 3-1 scope and the Manson would not set.
I intended to attach 10' of chain but it was 10pm and even here it gets dark about that time. I then launched my old Danforth w the same rode and scope in the same place. It
hooked up instantly and I even backed down w about 1/4 throttle * * ..held. By then it was dark and I was glad to be hooked up. there was a 10mph breeze coming down the 800' wide inlet. It got stronger and stronger until at 2-3am it was moaning at around 25mph w gusts to perhaps 30. By then I was sorry I didn't put the chain on the Manson and give more scope via the long way of the inlet and set the Manson. The wind changed direction a bit and put us quite close to the beach but the old Danforth held. About 4am the wind died. The GPS anchor alarm woke us up 3-4 times and each time I reset the swing allow for more swing * * .. swing we didn't have much of. That makes 3 times that old Danforth has come through w flawless performance where other "next generation" anchors have failed. I fully admit that I was asking the Manson to do other than what it was designed to do but my point is that a very old fashioned and much lighter anchor did the deed under the same conditions. Peter * *..I'm talking about the Fortress because it's the best Danforth type that can be had and the Danforth is the only anchor that has performed perfectly for me. I did say quite a while ago I may do this * *..that is get a Fortress for a working anchor and keep my Manson for the rocky stuff.
Something new I've noticed here in Alaska is that there is much more mud and sandy mud bottoms than rocky bottoms. We have lots of rocky bottoms but they are out on the points and around the Islets outside * * ..not in our snug little anchorages. So I'm thinking a bit more in terms of mud than rocks. You find that true up north SD?


Eric
Eric

 

[skipperdude]

Yep,
We get glacial cobble of foot ball sized rounded off stones.
Mostley at the head of bays where the glaciers are. I know this because I was attempting to set a mooring field near Whittier and had a diver friend of mine check the bottom. It was required by the Army core of engineers. In the small coves it is mostly mud and sand along with kelp and weeds.

SD

 

[Marin]

Eric---- I think you are setting yourself up for setting failure most of the time with your determination to use a very short scope. Trying to set an anchor with a 2.5:1 or 3:1 scope ratio just isn't going to work with most anchor designs. They have to dig in and bury themselves at least partway and with that steep angle of pull you're forcing them to deal with, they just aren't going to do it. You may get lucky once in a while as you did with your Danforth, but I think you're chasing a rainbow.

The anchoring advice in just about every publication there is on anchoring that states the ideal ratio is 5:1 (usually for all-chain) to 7:1 for combination rodes is not arbitrary advice. It's because that's what it takes to get an anchor--- at least all the common designs of anchors-- to set reliably and quickly in whatever conditions the anchor is designed for.

I can understand the need for a short scope in a tight anchorage, but the technique I've read most often about accomplishing this is to set the anchor using the proper scope for setting (5:1 to 7:1) and then once you know the anchor is firmly set, then bring in rode to shorten up the scope.

But to start out with a very short scope and trying to get the anchor to set yields the experiences you have been describing to us for some time--- the various anchors you have been trying won't set most of the time. The only thing that surprises me about this is the fact that you seem somewhat surprised that this is happening.

You don't use chain, so start using a 7:1 scope (or more to compensate for your lack of weight to hold the shank down) to set your Manson or whatever and I suspect you will find the anchors perform as well as they do for all the rest of us who have similarly-designed anchors. As it is now, it seems to me that you're being defeated by the laws of physics (and maybe geometry, too).

 

[Nomad Willy]

When the water is 60' deep and the anchorage is 800' across what would you do? I'd love to anchor at 5-1 scope and I'm going to do just that in Thorne Bay soon or perhaps Lake Bay. I spoze you would scope out the anchorage ahead before committing to it. Well I thought Lyman Anchorage was bigger than near by Windfall Harbor but I was wrong. My bad. I was just glad I had that little Danforth on the boat. From now on I'm going to have at least 3 anchors aboard and one will be the little Danforth * *.. it's earned it's place.*Marin * * .. if you don't follow the advice in Chapman's on chain why should I follow scope norms? I'm basically forced by the abundance of small and deep anchorages in the areas where I like to go. I feel I need to be able to anchor on short scope. Fishermen do it w monster anchors and chain big enough to drag a D8 around w the tracks locked w a D9.
By the way fishermen in general here don't even set their anchors unless they know it's going to blow.

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:


Marin * * .. if you don't follow the advice in Chapman's on chain why should I follow scope norms? I'm basically forced by the abundance of small and deep anchorages in the areas where I like to go.

Chapmans is a useful book but I sure don't regard it as the last word on boating.* Lots of good stuff in it, but like any book, there's stuff*that's not in it, stuff that doesn't apply to every person, and stuff that would be not so smart for a person to do in a certain situation.* It's an okay reference book but it's not the bible or the*[insert your religious rule book here].

If you want to anchor in small anchorages as you describe where you need a very short scope it*seems to me the fishermen have the answer.* Use a big-ass anchor and a ton of chain or wire rope and dump it all on the bottom.* If you can't accomodate that sort of thing on your boat, what that tells me is that either you're trying to do something you'll never be able to do with good confidence given the nature of recreational boat anchors*or you need a bigger boat

But a need to do something doesn't change the laws of physics. I understand what you're trying to do and why---- I just don't think it's ever going to work reliably*with the equipment you've been trying to use.* Or it won't if the wind blows.

 

[Peter B]

Eric, I'm concerned about this fixation you seem to have of not using any chain. My understanding is that this is an absolute no no. Even small craft who use synthetic rode are advised to have suitable sized chain at least as long as the boat, to hold it all down in some semblance of the correct setting angle and to guard against getting cut off by fraying on sharpish debris, rocks, etc. No wonder your Manson Supreme didn't set. If you are anchoring with all rope in a 60 foot deep bay, with limited swing, your rode angle will be so vertical with no weight on it, no anchor would be reliable. Like Marin says - you're fightin' physics there. The one saving grace of the Danforth is by it's shape, it naturally sits flat on the bottom, and so as long as nothing fouls either fluke, a bit of drag will set it, but only in a soft bottom. Please, get some decent chain on the Supreme, (and get it earning it's keep), or worrying about you is going to spoil my dry land sleep.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Y'all make valid points.When I went to college I was taught to question things and perhaps I over learned it.
Chain and anchor weight for me at this age is about 20lbs. If I put chain on my anchor I'll need to get a smaller anchor and I'm already undersized so I confess I'm probably looking for a miracle for an 8 ton boat. But I just may see a miracle on the horizon. If the Fortress can hold 4 or 5 times as much as my little (about 12lbs I think) Danforth I should be safe and there's every indication it will. But if it dosn't you guys are going to be saying I should have been spending my money on chain and a winch. So I've spent 350 on the 5/8 Brait line, 300 on the XYZ, 200 on the Manson and if I get a Fortress that will be another 350.
Well * *.. maybe it is starting to look a little stupid.
What if I was to consider chain. Would 1/4" be strong enough? That would be a lot of little links to depend on. I know 5/16 will be good.*How much would that weigh? With the Manson I'd like to use 3/8 and maybe 1/2" chain for about 6' but then the gypsy wouldn't work. Perhaps I should seriously consider the reel winch. Ugly sucker. AND expensive!*Then I'll need a wash down pump as I will no longer be able to splash off the mud. This winch and chain talk is depressing. What if I just put 10' of 3/8 chain on my Manson, got a small ($450) drum winch and use the winch drum and 5/8 line to get the chain up to the bow roller and just hand pulled the chain and anchor aboard? Compromise works for politics.
Marin, * *Books are just books and with all the information in Chapman's book there must be something wrong. Sounds logical but I have never found anything wrong and
basically consider it the boating Bible. If Chapman says "a small bit of chain" then thats what it is but my book is 1983 and this recent crop of "new generation" anchors didn't exist. I'm convinced these anchors won't set unless they are laying on their side and that lakes a bunch of scope AND chain to keep the shank down.
Well her's the ugly bugger and it's even on a Willard 30.

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:I'm convinced these anchors won't set unless they are laying on their side and that lakes a bunch of scope AND chain to keep the shank down.

Well, anchors like the Manson Supreme, Rocna, Sarca, etc. are designed to set ONLY if they're lying on their sides, so their designs are such that when they land on the bottom they ALWAYS end up on their sides.* So they automatically position themselves in the proper attitude to pivot down like a knife blade and slice into the bottom.

But you're correct, they won't do this if you're pulling up on the shank, which is what you're doing with your super-short, no-chain rode.* But a Bruce or a CQR won't set either, if you're pulling up on the shank.* As Peter said, a Danforth-type of anchor MIGHT set when you pull back and up on the shank but if it does it will only be because it is on a very soft bottom--- mud or sand--- and it won't dig very deep.* So its "set" will keep you from drifting away in the current or a light breeze but in the event a decent wind comes up I will bet it won't stay set very long.

I think you're trying to force a square peg into a round hole with all this.* As I see it--- Chapman's or no Chapman's--- there are a very limited number of formulas that work in anchoring.* In what I think is the order of preference----

1.* An anchor sized for the boat with sufficient chain on the rode (or an all-chain rode) and sufficient scope to allow the anchor to perform as designed.
2.* An oversized anchor for your boat that MIGHT allow you to get away with a less-than-normal scope ratio IF you have sufficient chain (or all chain) at the end of the rode to hold the shank of the anchor down to allow it to perform as designed.
3.* An undersized anchor for your boat with a LOT of rode out with enough chain on the end of the rode to hold the shank of the anchor down and allow it to perform as advertised.
4.* A truly massive anchor with no weight on the end of the rode because the thing is so heavy it has enough weight of its own to set without the need for any additional weight on rode.

You're not doing any of those things.* You're trying to use an undersized anchor with a nylon rode with no weight (chain) on it at all, and you're trying to use a very short scope to set it with.* So you have created a formula that won't work, like the monks way back when who were convinced that with the right combination of herbs and prayer they could turn lead into gold.

You've given us some additional information that says that you're weight limit for hauling aboard by hand is about 20 pounds. Okay, that's a valid requirement.* So what you need to do is apply that requirement to the four conditions I listed above.* The only condition it remotely fits is (3).* But.... this won't work because you say in the places you want to anchor you have to use a very short scope.

The ONLY way to meet your 20 pound limit requirement is to supplement your pulling power so you can retrieve higher weights.* That means giving yourself a mechanical advantage of some sort, and that means a windlass.* Doesn't have to be electric or hydraulic or heavy or real expensive.* A simple manual windlass would work if the slow retrieval speed is not an issue.* But as soon as you insert a windlass into the mix, all four of the formulas will work for you.* Some better than others but you can do any of them.

Right now you've got a small collection of anchors---- if I remember right an XYZ, a Bruce, a Danforth, and a Manson Supreme--- and you're thinking of adding yet another one, a Fortress.* Your theory is that if you have enough types of anchors on your boat, one of them MIGHT set for you with your no-chain, short scope, nylon rode.* From your previous descriptions, all the anchors you have now are considerably undersized for your boat.* So anchoring for you is a matter of trying one anchor, then another one, and so on in an attempt to get something to work.

Most boaters have one anchor on their bows.* The types vary because of local conditions or what the boater believes is the best design.* A few boats that are large enough to accomodate them have two anchors on the bow, usually of two different types---- a Bruce and a Danforth or a Bruce and a CQR are the combinations I see most often in our marina.* But even then, both anchors and their rodes (if they each have their own rode) are sized to fit the proper formula for the boat.

But most of us have just one anchor up there and--- regardless of the type--- they* meet almost all the anchoring requirements each boater encounters.* Our anchors are sized to hold our boats in the worst "normal" conditions we're likely to encounter and they have sufficient weight in or at the end of the rode to enable the anchor to work as designed.* Very few of us have the physical wherewithal to haul these arragements up by hand every time we anchor.* I pulled up our 44# Rocna with all-chain rode by hand once when our original windlass packed it in, but while I could do it I woudn't want to make a habit of it.

So most of us have a windlass of some sort so we can use the proper combination of anchor size and rode type, size, and weight that will hold our boats.*

That's the formula that works.

Friends we boated with had a 30' Newport sloop.* They had a Bruce anchor--- I think it was about a 22-pounder--- and a nylon-chain rode.* They didn't anchor a lot, but when they did it was no real problem for the husband to haul the anchor by hand.* Then three years ago they decided to take a five-month cruise to SE Alaska.* They knew they'd be anchoring in deeper waters, and they'd be anchoring a lot.* So they installed a windlass on their boat and I believe also added a lot more chain to the end of their rode.* This helped their anchor set faster and better and when they were over the anchor during the retrieve there would be chain up at windlass wildcat.* And as I recall they had no anchoring problems the entire trip.* Deep water, tiny bays, whatever,* they had the means of dealing with it and making their correctly sized anchor work for them every time.

So if I was you, my solution to the "small anchorages, deep water" problem would be to buy an oversize anchor for my 30' Willard--- probably a Rocna knowing what I know now but other anchor types will work fine, too--- a 250' nylon rode (since my 30' Willard may not be happy with a lot of weight in the bow), and perhaps 60 feet of correctly sized chain, probably 3/8" given the fact I got an oversize anchor that is probably in the 40-pound range.* Then I would buy a windlass to haul this stuff up.

And don't waste your time and money on 1/4" chain.* The whole idea behind anchoring is to stay where you are, not stay where your are IF the lightweight stuff you're messing around with happens to hold together.



-- Edited by Marin on Friday 23rd of July 2010 12:41:39 PM

 

[Nomad Willy]

Comments *on your well thought out post Marin,1. My Manson hits the bottom right side up.
2. My Danforth *DID *set at less than 3-1 scope. I don't know how it does either. If I was to try and predict where it would start setting I'd guess 4 or 5 to 1.
3. I found my 1999 Chapman's Book and it still says 6-8' of chain.
4. I haven't figured out the "lead into gold" yet either.
5. Perhaps I could haul up more than 20lbs. I can (just barely) pull my 90lb dinghy up to the cabin top. One would think I could pull an anchor rode of 30-40lbs???
6. Perhaps a manual windlass. I could crank reel hard and fast if enough bugs were present
7. I have no Bruce but have three Danforth's. Two are knock-offs.
8. Yes but part of me says Iv'e already got "one that works" * * ..the Danforth. The Fortress in one of the anchor tests held at 4,600lbs pull at 3-1 scope. Physically my Danforth is not that much different than the Fortress and if anything it should perform better. And a 15lb Fortress is sized properly for my boat. It's a no-brainer to think the Fortress would work.
9. Can't set a roll bar anchor in a very small anchorage.
I'm going to put my chain on the Manson and see how well the Manson works (sets) and see how well the anchor puller (me) works. I'm going over to Craig next week to get the boat hauled out. I'll probably anchor somewhere.
Here are some pics of fish boat ground tackle.
Pics:
1. Typical way lots of FB skippers carry their FF on the bow.
2. Typical LARGE Forfjord anchor on fish boat.
3. The mother of all FF anchors. This fisherman probably had a bad experience dragging over a mud bottom.
4. I don't remember what this one is called but is obviously a cross between the Danforth and Navy anchors. Since the Danforth dates only back to 1938 this anchor isn't as old as it looks.
5. Iv'e seen this boat in the area for almost 10 yrs and he still has the Danforth hanging there in the hawspipe. With all this fuss over "new generation" anchors many are obviously very happy with older type anchors.
By the way my 1999 Chapman Book says "frequently lightweight anchors such as the Danforth are set at 2 to 3-1". Hmmmmmm
By the way 2 * * All the pleasure boats I saw yesterday (about 10) had a CQR or a Bruce except the boat in pic #5.
Eric






-- Edited by nomadwilly on Friday 23rd of July 2010 05:59:12 PM

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:


1. My Manson hits the bottom right side up.

Did you not buy a Manson Supreme?* That is a roll-bar anchor, right?* But I may not have worded my comment correctly.* A roll bar anchor will land however it lands.* It could land on its nose (the roll bar) it could land upright on the bottom of the fluke, it could land on its side, it could land facing in the wrong direction.* However, the design of the anchor is such that as soon as you start pulling on it to set it the design of*the fluke, the shank, and the roll bar will combine to immediatly put the anchor onto its side facing in the right direction*at*which point it will then pivot the fluke*down into the bottom as I described.

I*can't speak for the Manson but according to Rocna's tests and demonstrations*and independent reports, in a "normal" bottom like mud or sand the Rocna generally drags forward less than a meter before it digs into the bottom and sets.* In our own experience the anchor sets very fast and very hard, usually yawing the boat around some when it pulls the slack out of the rode.* While our Bruce generally set well, it never set this fast or this firmly right away.

So at least in theory--- and it appears to me to also be in practice--- a roll bar anchor like the Rocna, Manson, or Sarca will set faster than an anchor like a Danforth which would seem to make it a better choice for small anchorages than a Danforth.

While you have gotten your Danforth to set on occasion with your no-chain, super-short rode, I would suspect that it didn't set all that well since you're pulling up on it to a degree when you set it.* But you're correct--- if you use a rode that helps set the anchor rather than hinders it the Danforth is certainly "an anchor that works."

In fact, given the situation you've set up for yourself, the Danforth will probably work better--- better being a relative term--- than a Fortress because the Fortress has even less weight to help it penetrate the bottom.* So since you don't want to use any chain at all, the heavier the anchor, the greater the chance it will set for you.* You'd be worse off with a Fortress as long as you insist on using a rode with no chain in it.

If you use a "normal" combination rode--- nylon with perhaps 30' of chain at the end---* and a "normal" scope to at least set the anchor, then the Fortress should work very well for you as long as you are anchoring in bottoms that favor this anchor design.*

 

[Nomad Willy]

Marin,When you make a statement back it up w at least a theory or an idea of how it could be so. You say a roll bar anchor sets faster * * * ....... HOW. I see every reason the Danforth should set faster but it's your claim so tell us why * * *.. don't just dictate to me what to think.
My Danforth has set ALWAYS. Where'd you get this "on occasion"?


Eric

 

[Peter B]

Eric, I know you don't like Peter Whatshisface (Smith actually, I think), the inventer of the Rocna, he is a bit opinionated, (unlike most of us of course), but to answer your last question to Marin, didn't you watch the video deomonstration?* If not this is the link (I might not get it to liven up - if not copy paste and watch it), because it does answer the question well as to how these roll bar anchors set.
http://www.rocna.com/main.php?section=misc&chapter=video&page=1&format=H264

However, whether the above convinces you or not, (and I suspect it wont), please, please, please....forget Chapman for now.* He is old hat.* He is not a saint, he does not have the last word on boating, and his words are not graven in tablets of stone, and I doubt anyone these days would advocate "just a bit of chain", when it comes to anchoring a serious vessel of significant weight.* Why do the Dashews use a Rocna on Windhorse.* Google their website and see what they have to say about it.
Please don't think we are ganging up on you here, we are not, we are just concerned you are wasting money trying to prove the impossible.* Do yourself a big favour, and don't waste another cent on more anchors, but get really enjoying your anchoring by getting a suitable electric winch.* Believe me, I have hauled anchors manually for 12 yrs when I had yachts, but when I got my first boat with an anchor winch I entered anchoring heaven.* Just do it Eric....then we can enjoy hearing about how much you enjoy your new Manson, not how much time you have spent swapping anchors that didn't set.* If your boat is 8 tons it is heaps heavy enough not to be miss-trimmed by the weight of a decent winch and 100 feet of 3/8 chain.* You will love how it fits neatly in your bow roller.* Those photos you posted - great photos - ugly anchors. Ughhhh.....

-- Edited by Peter B on Saturday 24th of July 2010 08:54:08 AM

 

[Nomad Willy]

Hi Peter,I'm sure glad someone noticed the fish boat anchors. Iv'e been meaning to do that for awhile. Sold my Forfjord to the habormaster here in Thorne Bay for $50. It seems Marin didn't even read the part of my post where I said I was going to put my chain on the Manson and have a go at it. I did enjoy the video and that on the beach pull w 4wd trucks seems quite common down under. I suspect that sand ect behaves differently when it's under water. The SARCA video was very similar. All that testing was w no scope at all so it seems to me that having chain wouldn't effect matters on the beach like that unless an anchor had a tendency nose in and flip up TE over LE. Like my XYZ. I can do that test on the beach here in Thorne Bay * * ..there's the perfect place for it out by the old sort yard.
Marin raised an interesting point about weight on the LE of the tip that leads the anchor into the sand. I suspect that the Manson, Rocna, SARCA and Danforth*have about the same percentage of weight on that tip (or tips). The Delta, CQR and Spade have weighted tips as do others so there is this issue w the question of "is weighting the anchor for the sole purpose of satisfactory penetration" worth the cost of a smaller anchor? Since there are lots of both weighted and non-weighted anchors on the market one would tend to believe there is no clear cut answer to that question. In the video it was amazing how fast the Rocna set * * *...and how poorly other anchors performed. If one did the anchor drag thing enough times and picked the best footage for your own product and the worst for the others that video possibly could be made to heavily favor any anchor on the market. I'm not saying Smith misled us in such a dishonest way but obviously it's possible.
As to Chapman being "old hat" * * ..to be sure he is * * ..he's dead. But Mr Maloney continues to publish and update the book. And I'm sure it dosn't get as updated as it could or should. Now that there are quite a few anchors that do not set or hold heavy loads at 4-1 or less scope some editing could be in order. Chapman did say anchoring at 2 to 3-1 was reserved for "lightweight and Danforth types" and perhaps that's all the editing required. And the expression "just a bit of chain" was NOT used in Chapman. It was "6 to 8 feet". And Peter I don't worship anything or anybody but Chapman is clearly the best, most complete and most comprehensive source of seamanship knowledge that I know of.
And yes * *..I think of you and Marin as good friends now that are concerned for me w my deviant ways and mean well with your criticism but a certian amount of my experimentation will continue.
And I now think Marin's "on occasion" comment came from my XYZ experience * ..
not sure.
As per your suggestion about getting a winch * *.. I'm going to go see if there is anything new on the splice thread but for now * *.,.how much trouble is it to raise a combination rode on the drum to the chain and then to switch over to the gypsy. Shouldn't be that difficult I would think even w a fairly heavy anchor and chain. Have you done this? How exactly do you make the transfer? Anybody?


Eric


-- Edited by nomadwilly on Saturday 24th of July 2010 11:52:21 AM

 

[Anode]

Anchor discussions seem to go the same way as religion or Fords and Chevrolet's. Mostly it's personal choice or what you can afford.
I let my finger pinching CQR go with the boat, two boats ago. Played with a Bruce and evolved to a Delta which is what I have now. They all worked but there were times when they were difficult to set because of bottom conditions or limited to scope in tight anchorages.
This spring, I helped a friend move his 40' sailboat from Annapolis to Rhode Island. A very cold and windy week. He had a Rocna and I was anxious to try it out. I can say I was impressed.
There's a 'modern' anchor in my near future. A Rocna or Manson.
My rule of thumb is one size bigger than recommended and my preference is all chain.
I carry a spare anchor (soon to be the Delta)*with rode and chain for emergencies and stern if needed.
There's a Fortress stashed in the lazarett for emergencies.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Anode,Noce boat. I think the Delta's are very good too but like the Rocna question their short scope performance. I suspect it would be like my Manson Supreme * * .. excellent holding but long scope setting. At least the Manson (according to tests) performs well at 3-1 after a 4-1 set. I'm going to test the Manson w 10' of 3/8" chain that weighs almost as much as the anchor (17). I discovered something disturbing today. I went shopping for a winch and found that almost all the winches are for the gypsy-splice combination rode. Looks like one either goes all chain or combo with the splice. I wanted to hand pull the line, wrap the chain around the gypsy and winch up the chain and anchor. Perhaps I'll be stuck w the reel type winches the fishermen use. They are about $3000. For your boat take a good look at the SARCA. Perhaps you can find a source to purchase one. Peter B loves his and over-all could be better than both the Rocna and the Supreme.
Your boat has a Perkins * *..right?


Eric Henning

 

[Tidahapah]

Now where do you start.
I used to carry a 75 lb plough as my main , a 45 lb plough as secondary and a 70 lb s/s spade as another spare or stern anchor. Plus a few s/s star reef picks.
The reef picks are on chain and poly rope with a deanchoring bouy.
The main which has now been replaced by a SARCA Excel 40 kg (88 lb) and 100 mts 1/2" tested short link chain.
Except in smaller boats nothing but all chain for this little black dog.
The spade is on chain and nylon rode as it is hardly if ever used.

I changed anchors even though I had never draged with my plough over the last 15 years but often used the 45 lb in tandem when a heavy blow was forecast.
I chose the SARCA Excel purely based on independant tests and still have not used it in anger so don't have any proof that it is a better anchor.
The SARCA owner from whom i purchased did state that if I was not happy he would take it back and refund my money, lets wait and see.

I have had friends who have nearly lost their boats during rough weather at anchorages in the Reef due to rope chaffing.
First thing they did after getting back to port was replace it with all chain.
The pantaloon cleaning etc was all done at sea on the way home.

Thats my 2 c worth

Benn

-- Edited by Tidahapah on Saturday 24th of July 2010 09:39:15 PM

-- Edited by Tidahapah on Saturday 24th of July 2010 09:39:31 PM

 

[Peter B]

nomadwilly wrote:I discovered something disturbing today. I went shopping for a winch and found that almost all the winches are for the gypsy-splice combination rode. Looks like one either goes all chain or combo with the splice. I wanted to hand pull the line, wrap the chain around the gypsy and winch up the chain and anchor. Perhaps I'll be stuck w the reel type winches the fishermen use.Eric Henning

Eric, delighted you are seriously looking at winches.* I know they are not cheap, but they last virtually forever if maintained even half way well.* However puzzled by your comment above.* There are gypsys which will handle combined chain, rope rode, as you say, so why would that not work for you.* However, if worried (possibly unnecessarily), by the doubt re integrity of that rope/chain splice, and you preferred to use the thimble splice for the rope to chain join Marin suggested was stronger - and assuming we have yet to convince you of the benefit and simplicity of all-chain), then I see no reason why you could not haul up the rope rode on that side of the winch, assuming one purchased one with the dual set-up, then move the chain over to the chain side of the gypsy to complete the haul, using a foot triggered switch, so you could stand there to do all this, of course.
My winch has a horizontal shaft with rope gypsy on the left and chain on the right.* It would certainly be do-able to use as described, however, as I have all-chain I have no personal experience of doing it and don't intend to.* However, I don't anchor in the depths you sometimes do, so in that situation I can see the point of a combined rode to save some weight, but please make sure you have 30 ft of chain if possible - the length of the boat is the rule of thumb here.
The pic below shows my set-up, and I'm sure you can see how it would go.* A rope/chain locker with a big opening lid would probably make it easier than having rope on* the deck and then trying to guide the chain down a hawse hole, I would think.* What sort of bow locker set-up do you have?
Happy anchoring.* You certainly have/are experiencing all aspects of it.*

*

 

[Anode]

Nomadwilly - Scout was repowered to Kubota. Original engine was a Pathfinder.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Chip/Anode, * * ..see my Face Book Page.

Peter B,
Oh yes I'm shopping for a winch but it's implementation may be a ways off.
My 3 anchors w the 10' 3/8" chain I'm quite sure will get me by this summer. Toooo
many things on the burner * *..typ summer in Alaska.
I've been looking at winches for about $1000 and all seem to be for the gypsy splice.
With your windlass I could pull the line up to the chain and then drape the chain over the gypsy and finish the job but the new winches in my price range are designed to dump the rode through the deck to the locker. I keep my rode on deck after we stunk up our whole fore-cabin of our pervious boat w mud and stuff on the anchor rode. On the Willard the chain locker is open to the bunk area like the Albin. If my chain turns my anchors into performers I'll probably get the little drum winch from West Marine for $425 and hand pull the last 10' of rode by hand. However I may go the all chain route but I'd need to build a platform to mount the windlass 8" or so above the fore-deck so as the chain is dumped on the deck I can pull it up and deposit it in the anchor rode box on deck. With the chain I'll need a heavier rode box too. Chain will bring up a lot more mud and stuff and maybe I'll need a wash-down pump as well. Too much to deal with now. But if I did the best anchor rode stunt it would be the reel winch that all the fishermen use (see the anchor pics). I know where there is one used but the last time I saw a price on it it was way high. During the week I'll search for a new one w electric motor drive or consider hydraulic as all the fishermen have. I like your winch Peter * *.. perhaps I could find one used. Lots of options.
Take a look at Anode's pictures and see all the work he's done.


Eric

 

[Peter B]

Eric, I think I understand where you are coming from now, and yes, everything is a compromise unless money is no object - not the case for most of us, and for those few where that's the case, I doubt they really get anything like the fun we mere mortals get out of doing it all the hard way....stre.....tching the budget as far as we can, saving hard....then finally obtaining that much sought after item....
So go with what works best for you, and good luck with that.....and I hope you can lay your hands on a second hand winch like mine, because it would be ideal for your situation.
Yes, Anode has done a great job on his boat - looks a treat.

-- Edited by Peter B on Monday 26th of July 2010 02:05:28 AM

 

[Nomad Willy]

I may need to head for the west coast tomorrow.*I read a bunch of those anchor tests last night and many seem to some kind of advertisement but I think I learned a couple of things. One of the tests was of only 3 anchors * *..Rocna, Manson Supreme and Manson Ray (a Bruce type). I always thought the Bruce was a poor short scoper and had to a great extent bought into Marin's Bruceatude but in this test the Ray did really well. I guess the largest yacht in the world has a Ray. The Ray set consistently at extremely short scope and even without any chain at all. It would seem to be my perfect anchor but I remember the XYZ. And even w no chain I'd need a winch as I'd be inclined to the 44lb w 10 or 15' of heavy chain.
Also I may have figured out why my Danforth worked so well at short scope. The shank is free to move independently from the flukes up to 32 degrees. 45 degrees would be 1-1 scope * *..right? Well 32 degrees must be extremely close if not exactly 2-1. So at 2.5 to one scope there would be absolutely no force from the shank to unload the fluke tips or pitch the flukes up and out of the bottom (even when the rode is perfectly straight) so 100% of the weight of the fluke tips that is applied to the bottom at 10-1 is applied at 2.5-1. Remember the word on the dock has been that the Bruce was good but the knock-offs weren't? Well it looks like it may have some merit and quite likely may apply to Danforth types as well since some perform well and others very poorly.


Eric

 

[FF]

"even w no chain
Also I may have figured out why my Danforth worked so well at short scope."

From WWII till the mid 60's the Danforth was not considered to NEED a chain lead.

Only when the competition of advertising D got into really tiny flyweights did the "need" for extra weight become necessary.

 

[Woodsong]

What size anchor are most of you all running on your trawlers (in the 36' range)? The boat we are buying this week has a severely undersized danforth style anchor. I want to switch to a plough style anchor...thinking a 35lb would be adequate but maybe jumping up to a 44lb wouldn't hurt? We've got a windlass and all chain rode. Maybe 35lb is enough?

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:


You say a roll bar anchor sets faster * * * ....... HOW. I see every reason the Danforth should set faster but it's your claim so tell us why

A rollbar POTENTIALLY sets faster because of the way the fluke or blade if you will is forced to slice sideways into the bottom as soon as you start pulling on it.* I wouldn't say ( and shouldn't have said if I did) that a rollbar ALWAYS sets faster.* But where a Danforth, Bruce, or even a plow might slide or skip across a bottom it's having trouble penetrating the sharp point on a rollbar anchor it pivoted hard like a knife blade*into the bottom which pretty much immediatly stops its forward motion and it begins digging in.

Every bottom has different characteristics so every anchor will act differently in different situations.* But in general, the rollbar anchors' design gives them an advantage over the more tranditional designs.

While the anchoring demos in the various videos are not actual "anchoring a boat" situations, they do replicate to a decent degree what the anchor will do in that type of bottom.* The fact they illustrate the behavior of a number of different types of anchors gives--- I believe--- a reasonable comparison of how those different*anchors behave in that particular situation.* So there is some value in the demos.* Moreso than if the manufacturer had simply demonstrated his own anchor with no comparison to any others.

As to your Danforth, I had thought I remembered your saying that on some occasions it took awhile before you got the Danforth to set.* I eventually always did, but not always right away.* But I may have misremembered that.

*

 

[Marin]

Woodsong wrote:

What size anchor are most of you all running on your trawlers (in the 36' range)?

Weight is not the only consideration.* Design plays a major role, too.* For example a Fortress anchor sized for your boat may only weigh 20 pounds, or maybe even less, but if used in the bottoms that its most suited for, it will hold better than other anchors two or even three times as heavy.

We use a 44# Rocna on our GB36.* We used to have a 33# Bruce, which is the most common size Bruce*used on this particular boat in this area (PNW).* While I no longer think a Bruce is a viable anchor design, if someone was bound and determined to use one on their 36' trawler I would recommend AT LEAST 44# and probably even heavier if their pulpit, windlass, etc. can accomodate it.

*

 

[Steve]

In my Monk 36 I have a 45 lb Delta and 5/16 chain on the Lofrans Tigres, and an FX23 Fortress 6' Chain and 200' 5/8 nylon rode on stand by. A 35 lb Delta and 33Lb Bruce are secured in the lazarette both more for ballast, the boat is bow down a bit, than for anything else, they will be replaced by lead ingots soon.
Steve W