Windlass, not a clue!!!

[markpierce]

My memory failed me.

*

 

[RickB]

Marin wrote:
I used the wrong term in describing the propeller end of the P-39's drive train. I said "short, hollow propeller driveshaft" or something like that.

*No, you had it right, the prop shaft was hollow to accomodate the cannon barrel.

The picture below shows the prop hub as it mounts to the hollow prop drive shaft. If you look closely at the reard of the reduction gear box in the other photos you can see where the barrel fits through the aft end of the shaft.

I always had a soft spot for the P-39, the CAF had one in San Marco Texas way back when and I used to fly up there from Houston to hang out while the guys worked on restoring it.

*

 

[Marin]

Looking at these illustrations it continues to amaze me that people can not only design, but build things like this. I've been at Boeing for a long, long time. I've shot in our fabrication plants where huge slabs of aluminum come in on special freight cars and are machined down into wing skins. The mill beds are a hundred feet long and the aluminum slabs weigh Lord knows how many tons. Yet they still require vacuum to hold the aluminum flat and keep it from shifting. And on and on and on.

When you go to an airport there will almost always be someone who looks at the 747 or 777 or Airbus out the window and says, "I can't believe something that big can fly." I have no problem with that whatsoever. They fly for the same reason the little Cessna or Beaver that I fly flies. What I can't believe, even after decades in the business and watching us do it, is that anyone can build one.

I find it amazing that people not only designed but could fabricate out of raw metal something as "simple" as the Ford diesels in our boat. Wood I can sort of understand. But metal? Amazing to me.


-- Edited by Marin on Wednesday 19th of October 2011 08:53:42 PM

 

[FF]

IF you have ever anchored in tight places such as Block Island you will see the advantage of all chain

Visiting Block, we simply use a Bahimian moore , two anchors fore and aft , lead to the bow , and stay in place and watch the crowd .

This way we can anchor in the shallower water , where the locals have grabbed all the space to charge for moorings .

Much easier to avoid a moored boat than an imbecile with 300 ft of line out.

 

[BaltimoreLurker]

Marin wrote:
Looking at these illustrations it continues to amaze me that people can not only design, but build things like this.

I have the same feeling about 17th/18th century sailing ships.* The amount of organization and coordination that went into building, sailing and fighting these incredibly complex machines is mind boggling.* And they pulled this off hundreds of times, 250 - 400 years ago.

And we can't seem to even get a damn road resurfaced around here without it being a 10 year project!

 

[Nomad Willy]

Thanks for the link Fly Right. The "imbecile" you speak of Fred is probably just trying to do a good job of anchoring. I anchored once in 85' of water just to get away form too many boats anchored in too small of a place. But you're right. Chain rodes do help a lot in places where there is too many boats and not enough room. But when the wind starts blow'in hard big heavy anchors drag w the best of them especially on short scope. But if it's good weather you can pack a lot of chain rode boats into a small anchorage. And the heavy chain will have lots of catenary (lightly loaded) and tend to help a low performance anchor perform fairly well. I anchored last night in a strange place and my XYZ didn't set right away as it has been doing so I was disappointed but this morning when I pulled it up I was a bit shocked as I could'nt see the anchor for all the weed. The stuff was like Scotch Bright. No wonder the anchor was having trouble setting. I backed down at 2000rpm and finally got it set and what I probably should have done was to pull it up to see if I could determine why it was'nt setting. Did'nt think of mass weed. As to using two anchors (I've been tempted) how does one do that without launching a dinghy? Looks to me like it would take 3 people.*

As to the sensitive CG on airplanes on my first ultralight (a flying wing biplane) the CG was so sensitive I could gain at least 5mph trim speed (probably more) by changing from sneakers to hiking boots while flying. But by saying a vehicle is sensitive to control is also saying that it is more controllable, IF indeed you have the means to control it. I flew ultralights that were like barges compared to the Biplane and I could do things w the biplane that just could'nt be done w the more stable machine so it was actually safer in many ways. By the way this may have nothing to do w the fact that my ultra controllable ultralight was a biplane. I'd say sensitive to control is more desirable than slow to respond but a good balance of sensitivity and controllability is no doubt best.

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:
As to using two anchors (I've been tempted) how does one do that without launching a dinghy?

*Well, you can do it but it might be*almost as much trouble as launching a dinghy.* We've never done but I've watched a boat do it.* What they did was deploy the stern anchor, pull forward and set it and continue moving forward until they were over where they wanted the bow anchor to be.* (So you need plenty of rode for the stern anchor.).*

They then deployed the bow anchor and drifted back paying out rode while at the same time a person on the stern took in the stern anchor rode as the boat drifted down on it.* When they got to where they wanted to be they set the bow anchor with a shot of reverse and once the boat had moved forward after setting the anchor (all-chain rode so the catenary pulled the boat back forward a bit), they tightened up the stern rode and that was that.

And you're correct, it took three people to do this, helm, bow, and stern.

We use a Fortress sized to be the main anchor for the boat as our stern anchor.* We carry it in a mount on the swim step and the rode is kept in a large plastic*milk crate on the aft deck that my wife made a Sunbrella*cover for.**The dinghy is easy to deploy*(Weaver davits and the boom fall make this a real quick task) and since the Fortress is so light it's easy to lift off its mount, put in the dinghy, and then put it over the side of the dinghy where we want it.* We have some*35 feet of chain on the Fortress and about 250' of nylon line.* The chain and line are sized to be the main rode for the boat as well.

 

[markpierce]

Are we talking about two anchors forward of the bow, or an anchor off the bow and another off the stern?* If we're talkin' bow and stern, without a dinghy, at least one rode should be substantially longer than the other if one wants to limit the maximum combined lengths.* (Drop an anchor, move away and set anchor, drop the other anchor, move away and set that anchor ending up with both rodes will adequate scope.)


-- Edited by markpierce on Friday 21st of October 2011 12:52:52 AM

 

[Nomad Willy]

Mark.

Marin said about his stern anchor "we carry it in a mount on the swim step" and "(so you'd need plenty of rode for the stern anchor". Bout covers it as I see it. You must be one of those speed and crash readers.

Marin,

That's exactly as I see it. So being by myself night before last I was quite sure I'd get the stern rode around my prop shaft and have a devil of a time w my propwalk. Here is another place where twin engines would be better. The only fairly good anchorage was plenty long enough but very narrow. Recommended to me by a fisherman*

. Anchoring fore and aft has a terrible downside in a cross wind as tension on the rodes would become strong enough to drag most any anchor, especially one full of weeds. And the boat would not only become part of the rode it would be broadside to cross winds. I anchored in another narrow anchorage (Lyman Anchorage) and even with a slight change in wind direction we were 50' from the beach half the night. Don't ask me how I know. So I'm not a fan of fore and aft anchoring. That leaves me w few options all including a considerable amount of chain. It's beginning to look like I may need lots of chain whether I like it or not. And I don't. Using a combination rode w a splice, all chain or a heavy combination rode and a reel winch seem to be my only options. I'm resistant to using all chain for reasons talked about at length in the past. I do like the simplicity and convenience of all chain so I'm thinking the weight penalty may be worth the extra weight on the bow. But the reel winch would be better performing (especially at short scope) and I could keep my rode on deck where I want it and nobody could say it may be a problem pulling the boat up to the anchor. Still a bit iffy on the splice. Convenient like all chain but w the chain weight where it belongs and perhaps the option of using the next size up rode w the chain weight savings. Right now I think I'll look into the weight of a new reel winch and see if it could be worth it to buy a new one v/s rebuilding my old monster reel. Here is a pic of one of the other Willard's on the island w a reel winch.*

 

[skipperdude]

nomadwilly wrote:
*As to using two anchors (I've been tempted) how does one do that without launching a dinghy? Looks to me like it would take 3 people.*

*
<h3>When simple's not enough</h3>

In more challenging situations, it is good to understand how your boat can move when Bahamian moored; it is also important to understand the direction and magnitude of the loads on the anchor system.

You can see in the illustration that in a single anchor mooring the boat is free to move within a circle with a radius roughly equal to the length of rode that is out (ignoring scope and three-dimensional considerations for simplicity).

With a single anchor, it is necessary to make sure that, if your boat swings toward shore, you will have enough depth. This requires anchoring farther off to allow for the swing. Even so, there is always some guesswork in making this allowance, and sometimes it would be nice to go closer to shore.
<h3>Closer to the shore</h3>
Note in the illustration that with a Bahamian moor, the boat is only free to move within the common zone of the intersection of the two circles. With this arrangement, when you drop the first anchor up against the windward shore, you are as close to shore as you are going to get. The anchor to leeward will not allow you to get any closer. Knowing this allows you the option of going in closer to shore when there is an advantage to doing so. Considering the example above of anchoring in 14 to 16 feet of water and letting out 100 feet of rode, if you choose, you could anchor in 7 feet of water and let out 50 feet of rode (vessel draft and tide permitting).

*Chapmans has a better view of a Bahamian moor.

Drop your first anchor and drive to where you want the second anchor paying out rode as you go. Let it go then back off to give scope. You can sit in the middle of two anchors or let it Y. The Y will give you more swing.

SD

*


-- Edited by skipperdude on Friday 21st of October 2011 12:30:03 PM

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:Anchoring fore and aft has a terrible downside in a cross wind as tension on the rodes would become strong enough to drag most any anchor, especially one full of weeds. And the boat would not only become part of the rode it would be broadside to cross winds.

*Absolutely.* We so far have only used our stern anchor in two situations.* One is when the winds in a relatively protected, narrow bay, like Fossil Bay on Sucia Island.* The waves kicked up outside by southerly winds only enter the bay one way--- straight down it's length.* But the winds can shift to blow across the bay at some angle or another.* So your moored or anchored boat points into the wind which puts it at an angle to the waves and the end result is a pitching, rolling movement that can become annoying afer awhile.* So we put the stern anchor out to keep the boat lined up with the waves.* The crosswinds can't get strong enough in bays like Fossil to cause the problem you describe.

The other instance is when we've been rafted with one or more boats and put out a couple of anchors to keep us in place when the wind kicked up.* With two bow anchors out the last thing we want is for the wind to shift and rotate the raft around and twist the anchor rodes together.* So we put a stern anchor out to keep the raft oriented properly to the bow anchors.

But---- there has been at least one instance when we've put our stern anchor out in Fossil Bay and the wind shifted to blow hard from dead astern.* The constant wind pressure from behind us set the Fortress stern anchor REALLY well.* As I said, it and its rode are sized to be the main anchor of our boat so we weren't concerned about breaking anything.*

I can usually break out the Fortress by hand from the dinghy if all it's done is keep our stern from yawing around in a mild crosswind.* But this time I couldn't budge it.

In the end we had to carry the stern anchor rode forward, cleat it off, then let go of the mooring buoy, and then ease the boat up over the Fortress using the gyspy drum on the windlass, tighten up and cleat off the nylon rode and use the boat's motion to break out the Fortress at which point we could retrieve it by hand.

So I agree, stern anchors can be very useful under several circumstances but they can also cause problems if you don't anticipate what might happen if--- or when--- the wind shifts.* If we think a stern anchor would be beneficial in a certain situation we always try to get a picture of what the winds are supposed to do during our stay before we make the decision to deploy it.

For people unfamiliar with this area, below are two views of Fossil Bay on Sucia.* The mouth of the bay faces southeast, and if the winds are from that direction they can kick up significant waves out in Rosario Strait that bend around and come stright in and up the bay.


-- Edited by Marin on Friday 21st of October 2011 12:48:33 PM

 

[Nomad Willy]

Very interesting Dave. I've never considered a 180 degree deployment. At high tide that would be doable but it may get interesting if another boat wanted past. Of course a 180 would turn into a 120 at low tide. Most of the time a Bahamian moor is to anchor in a channel or slough where current flows both ways. At least that's the way I perceived it. Reading Chapman's recommendations I could deploy my bow anchor after setting the stern anchor w all the rode out. Then stop my engine. Hand pulling my boat aft to where I can set the bow anchor w the stern anchor line out of the water. Some pulling in on the stern anchor would be necessary so would require 2 people. When alone one could use one of those big bungie cords that are used for self mooring to keep the stern line out of the water and "get er done". What an idea Dave. I'll let you know if I ever try it.

 

[skipperdude]

nomadwilly wrote:
*Of course a 180 would turn into a 120 at low tide..

*With our tides it could even turn into a 60 at low tide.**The idea is both anchors are deployed off the bow. So you wind up with the boat setting in the middle. If the wind or current swings you, you just spin around*by bow. I have tried doing the stern anchor and never really liked it. I have tied off to shore, that works but best in a calm anchorage with just the tide to worry about.

Wind or strong current I would rather have the boat spin around by the bow.

SD

 

[Nomad Willy]

Willy,

What are the shore ties for and what if the wind changes and the stern swings toward the shore. Looks like the boat could get caught up in the shore tie. By the way there is a new boat in Thorne Bay w a home made Northill. The home made ones have fixed stocks that are reinforced w welded rod like an A frame.*

 

[Marin]

Regarding the notion of using two anchors off the bow at an angle, what happens when, as often does when we anchor, the current reverses and the boat does a 180? And in some of the places we anchor, the boat is constantly moving round, completing many rotations over the time we're there. Seems to me that anchoring with two anchors off the bow would result in a big wind-up of the two rodes.

 

[skipperdude]

Marin wrote:
Regarding the notion of using two anchors off the bow at an angle, what happens when, as often does when we anchor, the current reverses and the boat does a 180? And in some of the places we anchor, the boat is constantly moving round, completing many rotations over the time we're there. Seems to me that anchoring with two anchors off the bow would result in a big wind-up of the two rodes.

*I don't know about that one. I have used this set up before and I didn't have a problem. Once it did get a little twisted but the second rode was only 200 ft with a 100'*coiled I just unwrapped it from the other anchor. 2 or 3 turns.

I guess you could rig some sort of swivel. I don't know the Bahamian moor has been around a long time. Gotta go find a Bahamian to ask *I guess.

SD

 

[stevensibs]

I'd like to butt in here...Marin, I think I'm in agreement with you. Nylon has such wonderful shock absorbing abilities, chain is heavy and piles up on the bottom (when I dive, I've seen this...) and is impervious to chaffing AND keeps the shank down low; so for me, a combination seems a good compromise. I am purchasing on Monday, a Lofrans 1500 vertical windlass with chain gypsy and capstan. My rode will consist of 250' of 3/4" nylon rode spliced to 125' of G4 5/16" chain ending at a 63 lb. CQR plow. My 42' Bristol displaces 35000 lbs. and everything I've read in here and elswhere tells me I'll be able to sleep at night. I am only unsure abou the chain size...should I go 3/8"?

Steve

 

[Nomad Willy]

Steve,

I'd go for a much shorter length of 1/2" chain. Would that be compatable w your winch etc? Prolly not. Just an idealistic idea.

Eric Henning

 

[Marin]

stevensibs wrote:
My 42' Bristol displaces 35000 lbs. and everything I've read in here and elswhere tells me I'll be able to sleep at night. I am only unsure abou the chain size...should I go 3/8"?

*We have a 36' boat that displaces abut 28,000 pounds.* Our anchor is 44 pounds.* We use 3/8" chain (all chain rode). With your boat I wouldn't go any smaller than that.

If you have not already done so I highly recommend the book "The Complete Book of Anchoring and Mooring" by Earl Hinz.* Best book I've seen to date on everything you might want to know on the subject including sizing anchors and rode.


-- Edited by Marin on Sunday 8th of January 2012 03:45:46 AM

 

[FF]

Take a look at the breaking strength of the 3/8 chain and remember that 3/4 nylon wont be stretching much till at least 10% of its breaking load is applied.

 

[Marin]

Actually, I was in error. Our boat's original windlass had a wildcat sized for 5/16" chain and we ordered our Lofrans Tigres with the same size wildcat. So we have an all-chain rode of 5/16" chain, not 3/8."

 

[Nomad Willy]

Hey Marin,

I was about to start talk'in about your excessively heavy chain.

FF,

When I pull hard w my own body on my 25' spring line of 1/2" dia there is an amazing amout of stretch. Feels like a big rubber band.

Eric

 

[FF]

"When I pull hard w my own body on my 25' spring line of 1/2" dia there is an amazing amout of stretch. Feels like a big rubber band."

There is a huge difference between straightening out the catinary , and stretching the line.

 

[stevensibs]

Eric, I just got off the phone with Imtra, the distributor of Lofrans. They practically ordered me to go with 3/8" G4 HT chain spliced to my already purchased 3/4" nylon line. I have a HUGE anchor locker and the weight won't even budge my fat boat downward. They said "if you want peace of mind go with 3/8". The 1500W of power on this windlass won't even break a sweat pulling up your tackle". So...as I am a student not a master, I do what I am told. LOL

 

[stevensibs]

Oh and BTW, thanks Marin, I just ordered the book from Amazon.

Steve

 

[Nomad Willy]

Steve,

Excess weight is undesirable on a boat. There are others that think just like the winch guys.....Marin being one of them but I am sure the combination rode is best. Chapman thinks so too. The book says the best rode is nylon line and a short length of chain. But some of these newer anchors require a longer scope than the traditional Danforths and claws and probably will benefit from more chain but I see ALL chain as a lot of excessive weight for no measurable gain. However nothing really bad will probably ever become of you w all 3/8ths except more slop and spray on your windshield. But installing unnecessary weight on ones boat can be a habit and accumulative over time such that a good boat can be turned into a dog that wallows in seas and is sluggish in getting her bow up on head seas. I think if I ever went to all chain on Willy it would be high test a size smaller than normal and I would do it for convenience.

Eric

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:I am sure the combination rode is best. Chapman thinks so too. .... But installing unnecessary weight on ones boat can be a habit and accumulative over time such that a good boat can be turned into a dog that wallows in seas and is sluggish in getting her bow up on head seas. I think if I ever went to all chain on Willy it would be high test a size smaller than normal and I would do it for convenience.

*Eric--- We've talked about this before but I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all solution for anything in boating, particularly not anchoring.* Chapmans is one opinion, and a very old opinon at that, and one, I believe, based on east coast boating on top of that.* The book is not God, although some people seem to think so.

I think you may be getting far more caught up in theory than the situation warrants.* With a very light boat, or a small boat, or a planing boat, or a boat in which balance is really critical, I agree that putting more weight in the bow can be detrimental.* It's probably not a good idea in Carey's lobsterboat, for example.* But the picture you paint of a boat with all-chain rode taking water onto the windshield and plowing around bow-down is just plain wrong.

There is no appreciable change of trim, or spray, or speed, or anything if a couple of adults and dog move from our main cabin to our foredeck when we are underway.* And that's on top of having 200' of all-chain rode in the locker and 44# anchor on the pulpit.*

When we bought our boat the spec sheet said it had 200' of chain on the anchor but when we decided to replace the chain, we found there was only about 90' in the locker.* We replaced it with 200 feet.* This made zero difference to anything--- trim, spray, speed, you name it.* Obviously it made some difference--- you don't add weight anywhere on a boat without something happening.* But in terms of a practical, noticeable difference?** Zero.

Steve's 42', 35,000 pound boat is not going to notice the weight of 3/8" chain in the bow even if he went with a couple hundred feet of all-chain, which is certainly what I would use in the PNW.* Will it make a measurable change in trim?* Of course.* Will the measureable difference in trim make any difference to his boat's attitude in the water underway, his fuel consumption, the amount of water he takes over the bow or the volume of spray into his windshield?* Based on our experience with our boat, no.

Theory is all well and good, but there are lots of times when theory--- however correct it may be--- is not really relevant to reality.* This, I think, is one of those times, at least in terms of the kinds of boats Steve and I have.* Your boat may be--- and probably is--- a different story.

Like I said, there is no one-size-fits-all solution.


-- Edited by Marin on Tuesday 10th of January 2012 02:02:26 PM

 

[Nomad Willy]

Marin,

We will never reach neutral ground on this. Excess weight to me is stupid. I just can't see having all that chain when it positively is'nt necessary. To me it's sloppy boating like having fenders hang'in over the side while under way. But my opinion is just that. It's a skipper's choice and either way works. So from now on why can't we just state what we think and go on. I'm not going to argue w you about what's right or best over and over any more. I state what I think then you state what you think and then everybody else is plenty smart enough to form their own minds around what THEY think. But about Chapman perhaps there's a big of argument left in me. I do'nt want to hear that Chapman's "OLD" stuff. Tell me what's wrong w what is presented in Chapnman's and I'll talk about that but the fact that Chapman's book started a long time ago dos'nt mean much to me and means everything to you. I know....if it ai'nt vogue it's garbage. Grandmother said cod liver oil was good in 1918 and I say it's good now. But you could prove me wrong ...there may be outdated information in Chapman's or even wrong information but as I recall they up date the book every year or so and I do'nt expect to find any bad stuff in the book.

Eric

 

[Marin]

nomadwilly wrote:
But about Chapman perhaps there's a big of argument left in me. I do'nt want to hear that Chapman's "OLD" stuff. Tell me what's wrong w what is presented in Chapnman's and I'll talk about that but the fact that Chapman's book started a long time ago dos'nt mean much to me and means everything to you.

Chapmans is a good source of information, but it's mostly general information (unless they've totally rewritten it since I bought my copy some ten or twelve years ago).

So on the subject of anchoring they cover the basics but don't go into much in the way of specifics.* Chapman's presents a one-size-fits-all*technique*in many areas, like anchoring, maneuvering, and so forth.* Earl Hinz's book on anchoring, for example,*makes the information in Chapman's seem like a grade school primer in comparison.

As I said, perhaps it's been totally rewritten.* But when I bought my copy and started looking at topics that interested me, I found myself saying "I already know all that, what I want is specific information that pertains to my kind of boat and where I boat."

Consequently, I don't view Chapmans as being particularly relevant to what I boat with or where I boat.* I*have purchased and read a number of books on subjects from anchoring to radar to weather.* But I have never found any use or reason to look anything up in Chapmans since my first perusal of it.* It's just too basic*and general*for my purposes.* Unless I want to know what side of the mast to fly a*courtesy flag*on.* For that, it's great.

So... a good reference book for novice boaters, in my opinion, but not the be all end all that I think a lot of people give it credit for being.

 

[FF]

The basics never change ,

the question of weather a 10lb per foot of boat anchor or a "new and Special" 20lb anchor will let you sleep, undisturbed. all night , is yours to decide.

While my preference so far for a tiny wind profile 50 ft boat is 60lb selections.

My next try will be an 80KG unit , 5 ft of 3/4 chain for a set it and forgetaboutit.