The Art Of Anchoring

[mvweebles]

Peter B wrote;
“They are both Sarcas, Eric, the first, with roll-bar, is the Super Sarca, the one without is the Sarca Excel.”

Indeed I know that but many many on the forum full of new guys don’t. And I wanted to know what SARCA Weebles was talking about myself.

I didn't really know the Sarca Excel. It looks a lot like a Delta, but it tests extremely well. Panope describes the differences.

QUESTION: Where does one buy a Sarca Excel? Appear to be Aussie-only. I'm not really in the market for a new anchor, but was wondering.

Peter

 

[psneeld]

Jetting in a piling where I am from (NJ and sounds the same where Ted is from) has nothing to do with mechanical/hydraulic driving...pure water jet and occasionally a light tap or two from the jet rig if it floats up before fully set.

Used to tow marine construction crane barges around and have watched countless piles being set.

Here is a video.... https://youtu.be/BinAe2fHJn8

So I get his comparison.

Maybe a better one is when you stand at the waters edge and before you know it, even tiny ripples will cover you feet in sand in minutes.

As we see from Steve's videos, many Nexgen anchors only need their tips to get a little start and thats all it takes. The anchor and chain don't know if it's the engine or a wind gust to do the rest.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Weebles,
Buy ARA (Anchor Right Australia) products through Ground Tackle Marine in the lower mainland near Vancouver BC.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Weebles wrote
“Ted, in the end, we are talking past each other. I simply cannot fathom being so confident an anchor (any anchor, including my Rocna Vulcan) will set that my only worry is that it will re-set. If I hear you correctly, you are comfortable with that your Rocna is so good at resetting that the initial set is a no-brainer - no need to power-set.”

We, in our anchor discussions frequently by-pass one element of great importance, that being power setting Indicates there’s a very good chance if/when your anchor (whatever brand) sets by power set it will almost certainly set again if broken out. It may break out on every reversal but you want the knowledge that it will re-set ... or reset several times. Not guaranteed of course but setting is the best way to know it probably will re-set when/if required.


But re confidence the Rocna users seem to be the most confident in their anchor. And I think I know why. At least several Rocna users have described the setting of their Rocna’s as a slam-bang event. Jerking the boat around sounding like they are about to experience structural damage just from setting.

I had one anchor 15 or so years ago that would do a jerk-set like Rocna users describe. It was the first XYZ anchor .. a proto-type I think. It did the jerk-set and at the time I think I was impressed and thought “it’s like I just hooked onto an old bulldozer down there and I’m not going anywhere no matter how hard it blows”.
Well unlike the Rocna the 1st XYZ was very hard to set. Basically it usually wasn’t worth the effort to deploy it. The later XYZ anchor worked well .... very well when set. I rode our two 50kt gales on two different XYZ anchors. Still amazed how well they held in the nasty. But I eventually decided the XYZ wasn’t worth having and that one rests in a landfill on Prince of Wales Is.

So the ability of an anchor to set instantly and perhaps violently may not be an indication it’s a keeper.
My own take on the Rocna is that it’s “tuned” for max holding power. That includes long scope and when the Rocna went up against the other hot dogs of the day it won the crown. It was (in the test I’m referring to) the highest performing anchor. And since most boaters consider max holding power the yardstick fir judging anchors Rocna’s sales skyrocketed. There was a time at Fishermen’s Supply in Seattle that Rocna’s “were everywhere”. They really sold a lot of them despite cutting costs with who knows how many Rocna’s with mild steel shanks. But people kept buying them even knowing that. Still do.

But Rocna is weak on short scope .. 3-1 to be specific. And Mr Smith offered no explanation for the poor showing (re other anchors). Most of my trawlering days were in SE Alaska and short scope anchoring is quite common. I’ve spent the night in small anchorages at 2-1 scope on a fairweather forecast. Sometimes in Alaska (and northern BC) you either take your 2-1 opportunity or go off in the dark looking for something better.

But if a friend had a Rocna and asked me about it I’d say “The Rocna’s a good anchor but it’s iffy in extremes of short scope and to a measured degree mud.” But if my friend had a anchor most all would agree here was not good enough I’d advise my friend to buy something else. And if I had one here in Puget Sound I’d probably keep it but up-grade when a good opportunity presented itself. On the east coast l may just keep the Rocna.

This pic is of the early XYZ that "Jurk set" like the Rocna.

 

[psneeld]

Wow....what an assumption to be certain...I would say just the opposite.

As I have always said...would love to see data on setting and resetting.... not just one or two time shots.

The videos are revealing and some of the best info I think, but hardly conclusive (yet)....

Watching Steve is a privilege....I bet there will be more to come.

 

[firehoser75]

This discussion is interesting. I definitely think that the different ideas presented here could be more regional and/or area specific, as least as to the conditions experienced and what works well for those conditions.

Here in the area of the coast of BC. Canada, we cannot see our anchor on the bottom without putting on a wet or dry suit and using SCBA gear to check it out. I have never seen anyone do that. Plus, as Murray has stated, sometimes anchoring on the mid coast is in depths of 100 feet. We have been anchoring regularly for over 16 years and over 1000 nights, so I have some experience (not new ). Here we get regular tidal changes of up to 24 feet in the more northern areas (my average would be 12+ feet). Therefore, in some areas, you may anchor in a reversing tidal stream, but we try to avoid the worst of it. We rarely anchor in anything but a very "wind protected" cove or bay so fetch would be small with only very small waves developing. Most often we anchor in sticky mud, sand, some weeds, or the odd time a rocky bottom. Only once have we dragged anchor. That occurred with a Rocna anchor that was lightly power set in a rocky bottom. It set well and easily in a narrow area where tidal stream would be felt more than other areas. We sat through 3 tide reversals with no problem, but on the 4th we dragged anchor (at 3AM of course). Wind was calm at the time. The normal location I would choose to anchor in this area was full, and places were limited. This was the first and only time I anchored where there was a poor bottom and I would have been located in the area of higher tidal flow. I don't blame my equipment or my technique for this happening. I blame my decisionmaking and perhaps was a bit overconfident (lesson learned). However, I don't see how in this instance or for that matter in most others, how the "no power set" approach would have (or could have) given a different result.
To me, especially since I cannot see my anchor, I want to know it is set and it will hold now. By "power setting" with a decent scope and using bearings to ensure we are not moving (dragging), gives us good comfort that we will be fine for the duration. As far as resetting (there are no guarantees); by using a good anchor with good scope, mostly all chain, and being at least a bit choosy as to location, I think that if it power set easily, it should reset itself as well. I don't see how not power setting at first will have any bearing on the ability for the anchor to reset? Scope, anchor and rode type, and bottom material all will have an impact on resetting. I know of several people who have dragged anchor after being in the same location for a few days, so not power setting but figuring that just careful observation for a few hours is somehow more reliable than a power set is puzzling to me. On a few very rare occasions, we have not been able to obtain a set within a few feet of where we have dropped the anchor. I was happy to find that out right away, rather than after sitting in mild conditions for hours and then finding out, possibly "the hard way".
I am not be any means arguing that if good scope is laid out that a slight wind or current will not set an anchor. Obviously this does work. Personally, I just want to know I set, and know it right away. (Positive feedback)

Another point. In many areas around here (Gulf Islands, Desolation Sound), the anchorages can be very crowded in the summer with many boats using what I consider to be "short scope" (2-3 to 1). The odds of a successful reset go down when using such a short scope. Personally, I don't anchor with less than 4-1 (deeper water) and usually use 5-6 to 1 or more (when swing is not an issue or conditions warrant).
Anyway, there are many ways to "skin a cat" as the saying goes, and if it works for you and gives you confidence, that is what really counts.

 

[O C Diver]

I am familiar with jetting-in a piling. You are talking about manual/mechanical intervention including a hydraulic hammer-ram to drive it home. With exception of a power-set, an anchor has no such manual or mechanical intervention so it's at the whim of nature. Rest a pile upright without mechanical intervention and it will take years to settle into a sea floor, even a soft mud one.

Peter

Apparently you're not familiar with jetting a piling.

Jetting a piling involves putting a small pipe along side a pile as it's being lowered to the bottom. The stream of water pressure is directed under the center of the bottom of the pile. The water pressure blows the mud and sand out of the way so that a hole is created for the piling to settle into. As the piling goes deeper, the water, mud, and sand come up around the pilings sides. When you reach the desired depth, you remove the water pipe.

Removing a broken piling can be done by having a diver put a choker chain on the piling to have a barge crane put upward tension on the piling. A jetting pipe is run down the side of the piling to loosen the bottoms grip and then break the suction from under the piling.

There is a limit to how deep you can jet a piling based on water pressure and bottom composition. Rocks and large shells will often prevent you from jetting a piling.

The piling stabilizes quickly but full strength in the bottom continues to improve for a day or so.

Edit: I see Scott has beaten me to the description with a video. In my mind, there has to be a holding difference with anchors, between "just set" and "set an hour or two ago".

Ted

 

[firehoser75]

On my email I saw 2 responses that I do not see here.

Anyway, in one, Eric stated that if while power setting and the anchor was just about to "let go" when the force was removed, that this would somehow affect the anchor's ability to reset???? I understand that in rare situations that the anchor being ready to be pulled out could occur, but how would not power setting ensure a set that is firm and that the boat operator would be very confident in, and how does either one greatly affect the ability for a self reset? No method of anchor setting gives 100% guarantees that I am aware of. Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand. I am not actually trying to get anyone to change their ways, I just want to understand, as I am open to maybe not knowing.

 

[Beaverlake]

Based on our experience with a Vulcan 33 with all chain on our 4788 I’d take issue with Hippo’s blanket statement that next gen anchors aren’t so good in weeds. We share Tom’s environment in the PacNW (big tides, tidal currents, deeper water, etc.) but our anchor log is more like only 150-200 nights. IIRC we’ve only failed to set first time less than five or six times. No problems with weeds or kelp so far.

We use Eartech’s to communicate. Lower anchor (not free fall) to approx depth, then bump reverse letting out more chain until we have appropriate scope, pause to let chain “pull us back toward the anchor”, then bump reverse until chain is tight and apparent motion stops. Set snubber, set anchor alarm. Depending on location we might do a check several hours later. So far no noticeable dragging after tide changes.

 

[psneeld]

On my email I saw 2 responses that I do not see here.

Anyway, in one, Eric stated that if while power setting and the anchor was just about to "let go" when the force was removed, that this would somehow affect the anchor's ability to reset???? I understand that in rare situations that the anchor being ready to be pulled out could occur, but how would not power setting ensure a set that is firm and that the boat operator would be very confident in, and how does either one greatly affect the ability for a self reset? No method of anchor setting gives 100% guarantees that I am aware of. Not trying to be difficult, just trying to understand. I am not actually trying to get anyone to change their ways, I just want to understand, as I am open to maybe not knowing.

Was one email about mine that referenced the "method of destructive resting" in "power setting" and when you test to a certain level, it could be on the verge of breakout...like Eric pointed out?

So how much pull do you have to exert as many here also tout that every time you anchor you have to anticipate hurricane force winds? Well, at least 40 plus knots? Even though the NWS seems to think differently.

 

[mvweebles]

Apparently you're not familiar with jetting a piling.

Jetting a piling involves putting a small pipe along side a pile as it's being lowered to the bottom. The stream of water pressure is directed under the center of the bottom of the pile. The water pressure blows the mud and sand out of the way so that a hole is created for the piling to settle into. As the piling goes deeper, the water, mud, and sand come up around the pilings sides. When you reach the desired depth, you remove the water pipe.

Removing a broken piling can be done by having a diver put a choker chain on the piling to have a barge crane put upward tension on the piling. A jetting pipe is run down the side of the piling to loosen the bottoms grip and then break the suction from under the piling.

There is a limit to how deep you can jet a piling based on water pressure and bottom composition. Rocks and large shells will often prevent you from jetting a piling.

The piling stabilizes quickly but full strength in the bottom continues to improve for a day or so.

Edit: I see Scott has beaten me to the description with a video. In my mind, there has to be a holding difference with anchors, between "just set" and "set an hour or two ago".

Ted

I'm having a boat lift installed. They jet and hammer the pilings, at least in this part of Florida.

I don't see the connection to why this explains why an anchor does not need to be power set. If anything, the opposite. Add some mechanical juice to the equation to drive a desired outcome.

I just don't get this thread at all. The idea that the next Gen anchors are so miraculous that power setting erodes their effectiveness is still foreign to me. An anchor has but one job in life: to keep a boat put. Anything that increases confidence it is doing its job is a good thing. I don't see how power setting does anything but increase confidence. And I don't see how power setting restricts or reduces ability to reset. So many things in life I don't understand.

Both sides of the power setting coin have now been well discussed. Anyone on the fence about best-practice in anchoring re: power setting has all the information they need.

Peter

 

[psneeld]

I think the problem you are having is that there should only be "one best practice" and it is required 100% of the time, some disagree that it is required 100% of the time.

The older and more experienced I get in life has shown me that hardly anything is required or done the same way100% of the time to get the job done.

As to experts writing articles...what is really possible......Suggest power setting all the time for newbies....or actually writing their expert opinion for every anchoring possibility experienced, long distance cruisers encounter?

 

[firehoser75]

Scott,
Yes, one of the missing posts was yours.
I agree with Peter, especially from the perspective that power setting does not in any way impede the anchor's ability to reset when needed (or conversely that letting the wind or current set it actually assists the reset). Power setting does not, however, guarantee that you will not (ever) experience some kind of a problem. Too many unpredictables (one of which was pointed out by Eric in the missing post), which is part of the reason I like to power set every time. For me, it reduces potential worries should conditions unexpectedly change. That happens around here more than one would think.

I agree that under many differing circumstances (that would be difficult to impossible to address them all except maybe if someone wrote an entire book of "what ifs") it is not needed to power set, put out hurricane scope, etc., and everyone is free to do it "their way" and use their experience to help with these decisions.

For me, I do it mostly the same way every time, for me, eliminating or reducing overlooking something basic, but I do adjust to conditions as needed. For example, if a storm is predicted, put out more scope than usual. I don't feel comfortable adjusting the other way, in other words going down to (for example) a 2-1 scope due to a calm prediction. To me, it is just not worth the risk (although it may be a small risk), so I stay with 5-1 which has proven itself to be fine for both calm and winds up to say 25 knots in the places I tend to anchor. In that way, I rarely have to get up in the middle of the night to make changes and that is how I like it .
I definitely agree that for beginners or just learning to anchor out, following manufacturer's guidelines and/or the techniques outlined in places like Chapman's (or our Waggoner's Guide) is the way it should be suggested and taught.

 

[Hippocampus]

Have been cruising with a Rocna for 7 years and I love it. But I’m cognizant it has its faults. It doesn’t do well in loose mud. It doesn’t rotate but rather resets. That’s not a problem with a good bottom as it resets quickly. We’ve learned to allow for that possibility and make sure we have enough swing for that to occur and enough surround of decent bottom when we’re in a situation where that may occur. But as stated above next anchor won’t have a roll bar. Don’t know what will be available then but for present like the combo of some concavity to the flukes and a weighted tip such as the Spade. We’ve usually hang out in a given area for awhile. What I’m learning from this thread that there’s some old school wisdom in carrying multiple anchors of different types. Many carry 3 a nexgen, a folding one like a fortress and something to anchor bow and stern. Think one should be roll bar and one not if you have a roll bar already.

 

[rslifkin]

Based on the experiences I've read plus what I've seen in Panope's videos, I'd say my top picks these days would be Mantus, Spade, Vulcan, and Excel.

Personally, I've got a Vulcan (1 size up) and a Fortress (slightly on the small side) on board. Vulcan is the primary (90 ft 5/16 G43 + 300 ft 5/8 8 plait), Fortress as a spare / kedge / stern anchor (6 ft 1/2 chain + 200 ft 5/8 double braid, would like to swap to 10 - 15 feet of 5/16 G43 for same or less weight but more length of chain). I've been strongly considering picking up a bigger Fortress at some point to keep aboard in disassembled form for "oh crap" situations or really soupy mud.

 

[mvweebles]

As you can imagine on a 36-foot boat, I'm storage-constrained. I didn't realize that the Mantus could be disassembled until I looked closely at the Panope video for their "dinghy anchor." I think that may well be my #2 anchor along with Fortress (#3). Vulcan is on my bow (a damn fine anchor best I can tell), but if I were to start from scratch, I'd probably go with the Excel on the bow, perhaps the Spade. Vulcan is fine, but I'm impressed with the Panope tests that gives a slight nod to Excel.

A good friend has a nice SS Ultra that he loves. Panope did a video review (link below) and while he likes the anchor, he has issues with affixing a shackle - the hole is made for an Ultra Swivel. For those of us who who prefer not to run a swivel, it's a problem as it means you may have to run a double-shackle to get the size right. Would have never occurred to me to check the shank attachment point had Goodwin/Panope not noted it in his review.

Peter

 

[rslifkin]

I had the same Excel vs Vulcan debate. In my case, the shorter toe length of the Vulcan won, as I could fit the 73lb one with plenty of hull clearance (even the 88 lb would fit, but it would be tight). The Excel would have been very close to hitting in any reasonable size.

 

[firehoser75]

My primary is a Vulcan as well. I like it a lot. My backup anchor is my old Rocna, one size smaller, and I also carry a (smaller) Fortress that has never been out of the laz since I have owned the boat. It could be used for a stern anchor or a "when all else fails".
My main rode is 5/16 inch G40 chain (275 feet) with 150 feet of 5/8 inch nylon rode spliced on for use when we have to anchor in deep water (say over 60 feet), and the backup (old) rode is about 100 feet of the G40 5/16 chain and 150 feet of 5/8 inch nylon 8 plait.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Peter (Weebles) wrote;
“This probably comes down to cruising grounds. With all due respect Ted, you seem okay with the idea of re-setting - maybe that works fine in popular cruising grounds. I see re-setting as an emergency parachute that will hopefully never be deployed.”


In some places I would agree w you but for general anchoring I think you can pretty much depend on a re-set. And setting in the first place is somewhat near knowing it will probably set again. Of course if you’ve anchored in some anchorage 30 times you’re even more sure.

This forun has made me more aware of reversal possibilities. But most of the time in Alaska the night and early morning hours are so calm wind direction is immaterial. But we have big tides and they definitely will bring about a reversal. But most of my reversals were probably so benign that the anchor held the boat backwards. Perhaps I should consider what anchor would hold best backwards. haha

One thing that will probably reduce worry to near zip is to use a Navy or Dreadnought or similar ship anchor. That may be one of the reasons the type is so common on ships. You will notice that Steve has a Forfjord hang’in on his bow. He’s made no claim to be using it though. I’ve only used my Dreadnought once. And it sorta set it’self. When I took the slack out of the rode in reverse the line went taught. With every other kind of anchor setting involved some amount of draging. Not so the Dread.

 

[O C Diver]

So Peter, what percentage of the time does your anchor pull free when you power set? This is assuming you're scoping 5:1 as you mentioned in an earlier post.

Ted

 

[mvweebles]

So Peter, what percentage of the time does your anchor pull free when you power set? This is assuming you're scoping 5:1 as you mentioned in an earlier post.

Ted

I have never had an anchor pull free. I've seen a Danforth foul on a reversing current, but was somebody else's boat. Danforths are great anchors except they have a nasty habit of the rode fouling the crown on a reversing current. I watched a 30-foot sailboat drift a good half-mile at China Camp in SF Bay (owner was ashore and got in his dinghy to fetch).

As mentioned, I've dragged a few times, but with in the older days when I ran a CQR versus today's modern anchors. And I've been unable to set an anchor twice - once with a Delta, don't remember the other as it was someone else's boat. Maybe I should have tried a different anchor.

I typically run 5:1. There are some deeper anchorages on the West Coast such as Channel Islands Nat'l Park so I'll sometimes power-set at 5:1 or slightly more, then retrieve some rode to 4:1 or maybe a tad less so. I ran a Bruce for years and while it wasn't the best anchor, it was indeed good on short scope. There are a couple open roadstead anchorages along the coast that regularly get big wind gusts - 40+ kts is not unusual (Drakes Bay 25 nms north of GG Bridge being one). I'll run at least 7:1 there. Holding is good and it's a big anchorage used mostly by fishing boats so it's easy to spread out. Other anchorages along the coast have a lot of kelp which is a love/hate thing. Kelp forest tends to knock-down swell, but it does confound holding if you don't get inside it.

Not sure how to further answer your question. Vast majority of my anchor experiences have been delightfully uneventful. But the few that were not uneventful left an indelible imprint on me.

Peter

 

[O C Diver]

I have never had an anchor pull free. I've seen a Danforth foul on a reversing current, but was somebody else's boat. Danforths are great anchors except they have a nasty habit of the rode fouling the crown on a reversing current. I watched a 30-foot sailboat drift a good half-mile at China Camp in SF Bay (owner was ashore and got in his dinghy to fetch).

As mentioned, I've dragged a few times, but with in the older days when I ran a CQR versus today's modern anchors. And I've been unable to set an anchor twice - once with a Delta, don't remember the other as it was someone else's boat. Maybe I should have tried a different anchor.

I typically run 5:1. There are some deeper anchorages on the West Coast such as Channel Islands Nat'l Park so I'll sometimes power-set at 5:1 or slightly more, then retrieve some rode to 4:1 or maybe a tad less so. I ran a Bruce for years and while it wasn't the best anchor, it was indeed good on short scope. There are a couple open roadstead anchorages along the coast that regularly get big wind gusts - 40+ kts is not unusual (Drakes Bay 25 nms north of GG Bridge being one). I'll run at least 7:1 there. Holding is good and it's a big anchorage used mostly by fishing boats so it's easy to spread out. Other anchorages along the coast have a lot of kelp which is a love/hate thing. Kelp forest tends to knock-down swell, but it does confound holding if you don't get inside it.

Not sure how to further answer your question. Vast majority of my anchor experiences have been delightfully uneventful. But the few that were not uneventful left an indelible imprint on me.

Peter

I guess where I'm going with this is that you don't know if power setting was necessary (this isn't a criticism). There's probably no way for you to know if dumping the anchor overboard, setting scope, and adding the snubber would be sufficient. If you had said, "1% of the time it pulls free", one could conclude it fails enough that it has to be tested.

When I first started using my Rocna, I would dump it overboard, set scope, add the snubber, and then straighten the chain out to see if the hook had dug in. Much of the time, the tidal current performed the test for me. After a while I stopped doing it as it never failed. If it's going to blow significantly, I may do more depending on the situation.

Ted

 

[mvweebles]

I guess where I'm going with this is that you don't know if power setting was necessary (this isn't a criticism). There's probably no way for you to know if dumping the anchor overboard, setting scope, and adding the snubber would be sufficient. If you had said, "1% of the time it pulls free", one could conclude it fails enough that it has to be tested.

When I first started using my Rocna, I would dump it overboard, set scope, add the snubber, and then straighten the chain out to see if the hook had dug in. Much of the time, the tidal current performed the test for me. After a while I stopped doing it as it never failed. If it's going to blow significantly, I may do more depending on the situation.

Ted

I respect your opinion based on reading so many of your learned posts. But I'll never be able to answer your question. Anchoring without power setting would be akin to not buckling my seat belt in a car. Its just something I do to reduce risk. I've done it for so long I feel naked if I don't do it even though I haven't had an accident in a million miles of driving

Peter

 

[O C Diver]

I respect your opinion based on reading so many of your learned posts. But I'll never be able to answer your question. Anchoring without power setting would be akin to not buckling my seat belt in a car. Its just something I do to reduce risk. I've done it for so long I feel naked if I don't do it even though I haven't had an accident in a million miles of driving

Peter

How did you ever convince yourself to go to a shorter scope (from 7:1 to 5:1)?

Ted

 

[mvweebles]

1500 RPM of reverse thrust.

 

[catalinajack]

I did that two years ago trying to back off a sand bar and blew out a DriveSaver coupling. Be careful if you have them.

1500 RPM of reverse thrust.

 

[mvweebles]

I did that two years ago trying to back off a sand bar and blew out a DriveSaver coupling. Be careful if you have them.

Really? That's a good tip. I'm surprised.

BTW - my little Willard 36 has a 75hp Perkins 4.236. 1500 may be a bit of an exaggeration. I normally power set at a few hundred RPM over idle, so maybe 1000 RPM.

Peter

 

[O C Diver]

An interesting hijack:
How much force can a boat generate in reverse to test the holding of an anchor? I have seen that I can easily idle forward into 50 knot winds, gaining ground. If I were to back down hard with my 28" four bladed wheel, I could generate a tremendous amount more force than 50 knot winds. 1,800 RPM going forward pushes my boat at 8 knots.

Ted

 

[mvweebles]

An interesting hijack:
How much force can a boat generate in reverse to test the holding of an anchor? I have seen that I can easily idle forward into 50 knot winds, gaining ground. If I were to back down hard with my 28" four bladed wheel, I could generate a tremendous amount more force than 50 knot winds. 1,800 RPM going forward pushes my boat at 8 knots.

Ted

I edited my initial response that had 1800 RPM. It was an exaggeration.

But anecdotally, I guess I believe an anchor should sized to take a decent reverse thrust - a few hundred RPM above idle. Rule won't hold with all boats such as sport fishers with gigantic engines, but you get the point. If anchor matches the boat, it should hold a decent reverse thrust.

Peter

 

[O C Diver]

I edited my initial response that had 1800 RPM. It was an exaggeration.

But anecdotally, I guess I believe an anchor should sized to take a decent reverse thrust - a few hundred RPM above idle. Rule won't hold with all boats such as sport fishers with gigantic engines, but you get the point. If anchor matches the boat, it should hold a decent reverse thrust.

Peter

Sure, but I think about the average cruising sailboat with what seems a very small prop, and wonder how one balances what would be a reasonable amount of force versus excessive force.

Ted