Panope

Anchor Geekdom

Recommended Posts

On 9/30/2020 at 12:56 PM, Max Rockatansky said:

Re: windlass:

Having a multihull, I am all about keeping weight off the boat. I also don’t want any more things to fix.

that said, IMO a windlass is not just convenient but is a safety item. I am less reticent to reset a marginal set. I am less reticent to pull up and leave when jackwagons anchor too near or if the anchorage becomes less tenable. If weather is difficult for set or retrieval, worrying about injury is something I’d rather do without. I’m fairly Luddite but IMO a windlass is well worth its salt. And BTW our technique always is to motor to follow the chain, get over the pick, lock the chain and break out under power

I like to sail off the anchor when possible. That's why I don't usually have the wife just motor over the rode.  I'm not reticent to reset if marginal but I admit that I suffer jackwagons rather than up and reset elsewhere.

I have considered one of the compact, vertical manual windlasses.  There will probably come a time where I'm forced into it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Panope said:

 

I hope they send you their new, rollbar-less M2 design for testing. I've got their first edition M1 and it works great but it's about as large as will fit on my bow and, as you mentioned, doesn't self-launch. I can see an argument for an anchor that prefers to stay on board unless kicked off but big + heavy + shy is a bit of a PITA on my boat. However, she's earner her keep with her performance underwater. If the M2 is as good but smaller and self-launching, I'd upgrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IStream,

You could try sending Mantus a message with your wish for me to test an M2.  While you are at it, send one to Rocna also.  I am missing their rollbar version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will do on the M2. I've corresponded with them before and because I own one of their babies, they may listen. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IStream said:

Will do on the M2. I've corresponded with them before and because I own one of their babies, they may listen. 

Done.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not be surprised, if a manufacturer is reluctant to submit anchors to me on account of the modification/mutilation that I performed on the Manson Supreme (an anchor that I bought with my own money).

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve have you talked to Dave Farber the manager at Fisheries?  He may be willing to work with you provided they can use your videos in the store. I could see them having the compilation video going. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't met Dave but I'd certainly be up for them using whatever I've got.

That said, my "compilation video" is getting a little long in tooth.  This winter, I hope to make a new compilation that includes all the new anchors and test protocols.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Next time you are down there ask for him in the display store, super nice guy.  They usually have a huge inventory and the owner is all over demo stuff like that. Tell him Jake and Burgandy said you can borrow whatever you want....

Only issue would be if some of the manufacturers have some wierd clause about it. The distribution game is pretty cut throat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Panope said:

I would not be surprised, if a manufacturer is reluctant to submit anchors to me on account of the modification/mutilation that I performed on the Manson Supreme (an anchor that I bought with my own money).

I'm gonna go ahead and assume that since Mantus willingly sent you the M1, they wouldn't have any reservations about sending you the M2, even if you are inclined to mutilate it rather than giving it to me. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that there selling the m2 if you click on any of the m2 to buy there out of stock .I think they stopped selling them for a design change

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2020 at 5:21 AM, weightless said:

Yes, and I can't tell the difference between a coffee cup and a donut!

I still haven't heard a good argument or examples of kellets making a difference in extreme conditions. Just add the additional weight directly to the primary anchor for maximum effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Mark Morwood said:

Yes, and I can't tell the difference between a coffee cup and a donut!

I still haven't heard a good argument or examples of kellets making a difference in extreme conditions. Just add the additional weight directly to the primary anchor for maximum effect.

Pretty much, the anchor alone needs to do the job regardless of road in all conditions. Setting on a boulder pile being the one exception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mark Morwood said:

I still haven't heard a good argument or examples of kellets making a difference in extreme conditions.

Most of the arguments against kellets working in bad conditions that I've seen assume a static world. If the wind is swirling then a boat can get moving very quickly and then come up with a big shock load particularly if the boat has gotten out of alignment with the wind.. If there's a chop, sea or surge then there will be shock loads. A kellet could start acting to slow the boat down before a snubber and is potentially a better shock absorbing device. Are they really helpful? IME, yeah, sometimes, but for sure the details matter.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chain catenary is what makes anchoring work for big ships. Yachts all too often don't have: all-chain rode; heavy enough anchor chain; enough scope to maximize catenary. If your anchor chain is straight and bar-taught in heavy wind, you don't have what it takes to anchor successfully but, if you're lucky, your anchor may still hold if you're well 'hooked'.  A kellet is just a cheat to try and maintain catenary, as is two anchors in series. Steve has the right kind of anchoring gear on sv Panope; you will note that the chain and the anchor shank stay on the bottom when he executes his 180 degree resets. If the chain or the shank lifts off the bottom in wind gusts, you're not going to stay anchored very long, especially if there is a sea running.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anchor is to hold the chain , chain holds the vessel .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2020 at 11:31 AM, Ajax said:

One of the issues I've been fighting, is finding a 33-35lb anchor with the best performance that will fit the best on my bow.

The Vulcan seems to be the most compact in its class. It's 5 inches narrower than my Manson Boss or the original Rocna and the shank is 5 inches shorter (from the roller on back) than the Boss or the original Rocna.  Steve's tests seem to indicate that the Vulcan performs better on the resets than an original Manson Supreme.

The Vulcan may not be the "best" anchor out there, but it's the best of my readily available, affordable choices that will fit well and perform well.  My local shop is having a sale in a few days so I think I'll pull the trigger. 

Hopefully 10 more pounds doesn't exceed my lumbar rating. ;)   My recent system seems to work well-  I sit on my ass and brace my feet against the bow chocks with the hawse pipe between my legs.  I retrieve the rode and feed it into the pipe until the boat is over the anchor and with a little wiggling, I'm able to break it out.  On really windy days, I'll take a turn on a bow cleat and have my spouse bump it into gear and run over the anchor to break it out.  Heavy work gloves make all the difference.  I'm really trying to avoid installing a windlass.

Ajax

I also don't want to install a windlass.  I use a 3:1 block and tackle with a chain hook on my 45 lbs mantus, when the going gets tough.  Works well for me and saves the back

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, py26129 said:

Ajax

I also don't want to install a windlass.  I use a 3:1 block and tackle with a chain hook on my 45 lbs mantus, when the going gets tough.  Works well for me and saves the back

Hey, that's a great idea!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no better investment on a boat than a good electrical windlass.  Good quality windlasses are affordable.  Can't think of any good reason not to instal one. We had a knuckle destroying Simpson on our last boat and sailed on this boat for a few years before I overhauled and installed our Lofrans.  It really changes alot of how you use the boat.  No contemplating the difficulty of retrieval, going all chain is easy.  More importantly we have been caught in a couple lee shore squalls and by hand or a manual windlass it may have been a grounding.

Yes lots of people don't have electric windlasses and will espose the wonderful simplicity of their life.  But.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My windlass has a warping drum which is dead handy for sending SWMBO up the rig.  No sweat, no fuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Whinging Pom said:

My windlass has a warping drum which is dead handy for sending SWMBO up the rig.  No sweat, no fuss.

And you get to look at her ass. Win win!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Mid said:

Anchor is to hold the chain , chain holds the vessel .

Mid,

I am not exactly sure what you are saying, but if you are implying that friction between chain and seabed accounts for significant holding power,  I disagree.

I have dozens of video shots of numerous anchors showing the chain lifted completely off the bottom under engine power only.  All holding power must coming from the anchor.

Certainly, the chain catenary is helping keep the "angle" of the anchor lower with respect to the seabed, thus increasing holding power.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Panope said:

I have dozens of video shots of numerous anchors showing the chain lifted completely off the bottom under engine power only. 

not enough chain :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
Quote

 

, former US Navy Surface Warfare Officer (1986-2008)
Answered May 9, 2018 · Author has 143 answers and 90.5K answer views
 

The primary force holding an anchored ship in place is the weight of the chain lying on the bottom and its friction with the bottom of the sea. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Panope said:

Ok, how much?

enough to do the job ....

and large enough as well ...

 

yes impractical on a yacht ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Large ship anchors must really suck.

Wonder if they will ever advance past 1800's technology.

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's funny the big Jenuau we just tested the fortress on had 19mm chain, failed sets with 120meters of chain out.  I guess they could go up to 24mm or maybe 40mm chain??

Pretty sure 8 shots of huge chain on a ship is a little different math than your typical sailboat. The smallish sized ships in the fishing fleet I worked on 300+- ft. all had to hide from a huge blow on the west coast several years ago, mostly in front of Port Townsend and Port Angeles, I think half of them drug and ended up jogging.  The one square head captain who stayed out got the entire wheelhouse wiped all antennas gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's why I love Steve's videos, not only black and white actual color real-time answers to all the mysteries of setting the hook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Almost the same weight.  Look at the size difference. 

20201008_154605.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The multihulls I've had can't carry much chain, usually no more than 15 feet per anchor. Multihulls also demand a lot from anchor gear because of windage and because when the anchor drags, the boat takes off. I'd rather have a stretchy rode and good anchor gear than a ton of chain.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, olaf hart said:

The Boss is the boss in sand and mud...

Due to the large surface area, I agree but it's just way too large for my bow.  The Vulcan is larger and heavier than my 25lb. Manson Supreme so I'll be OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vulcan is a great anchor you will be happy, we have for many miles and few decent blows.  Steves video really backs up it's performance.

That's funny Russel, our friends built one of your dad's Tri's and we cruised alot together years ago in our Crealock full keel ketch with all chain rode.  Usually anchoring close, made for some interesting times when it blew.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for these incredibly valuable videos. They show that mythology cannot compete with empiricism! Looking up how to make a contribution for all of your work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ajax said:

Due to the large surface area, I agree but it's just way too large for my bow.  The Vulcan is larger and heavier than my 25lb. Manson Supreme so I'll be OK.

I have a 15# Boss (10# recommended) on my 22' power boat and it looks huge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Panope  LOL...that video is quite the scam! With nothing in the screen for perspective, I was totally fooled. The fact that this "toy" anchor held your boat which is much heavier than mine, has convinced me to buy one of these as a race anchor so that I can get 50-75lbs. out of the bow.

I swapped out my Supreme 25lb. for the new Vulcan 33lb. on the bow roller last night. It is amazing that dimensionally, the Vulcan is only a little larger. It fits perfectly, and doesn't look like an oversized winged hood ornament from a 1915 Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost.

I know that this thread has already covered that the galvanizing seems poor across several vendors but the Supreme was getting some large rust spots on it. I hope the Vulcan's galvanizing lasts longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve's got me thinking about a daisy chain of little stainless Manti to replace my one galvanized biggun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, IStream said:

Steve's got me thinking about a daisy chain of little stainless Manti to replace my one galvanized biggun.

Jordan Series Anchor?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, IStream said:

Steve's got me thinking about a daisy chain of little stainless Manti to replace my one galvanized biggun.

Sort of like the Jordan series drogue of anchors?

D'oh, he beat me to it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ajax said:

@Panope  LOL...that video is quite the scam! With nothing in the screen for perspective, I was totally fooled. The fact that this "toy" anchor held your boat which is much heavier than mine, has convinced me to buy one of these as a race anchor so that I can get 50-75lbs. out of the bow.

I swapped out my Supreme 25lb. for the new Vulcan 33lb. on the bow roller last night. It is amazing that dimensionally, the Vulcan is only a little larger. It fits perfectly, and doesn't look like an oversized winged hood ornament from a 1915 Rolls-Royce Silver Ghost.

I know that this thread has already covered that the galvanizing seems poor across several vendors but the Supreme was getting some large rust spots on it. I hope the Vulcan's galvanizing lasts longer.

Happy to hear that a few people took the bait!

I'll mention that the 2.5 lb. Mantus fouls (does not set) with only small leafs of weed.

Mantus makes an 8 lb. version with their "quick connect" system.  That would actually be an appropriate lunch hook.  Pricey, at $360.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Panope said:

Happy to hear that a few people took the bait!

I'll mention that the 2.5 lb. Mantus fouls (does not set) with only small leafs of weed.

Mantus makes an 8 lb. version with their "quick connect" system.  That would actually be an appropriate lunch hook.  Pricey, at $360.

Would love to see the effect, if any, of sharpening up the edge of that baby Mantis on it ability to get through a leaf of weed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/17/2020 at 11:59 AM, Panope said:

 

Great video! I am always amazed at people talking about how bad the CQR is. My dad got one in 1972 and we used it up until a few years ago when he donated his Bristol 40. I had one for 10 years on my own boat. We cruised from the Chesapeake bay to Maine. We anchored a lot. Always took care to set the anchor at about 5:1 scope with rope and chain, backed down in reverse at half power, felt the anchor skip, then set. We then usually put out 7:1. We NEVER dragged. About 80% of the time, the anchor set on the first attempt. Always was able to get it to set on a second or rarely a third. If it didn't set, it was usually fouled with weeds. We anchored during numerous squalls with winds up to 60 kn and wind shifts. NEVER dragged. Not once.  The bottoms were usually heavy sand and heavy thick mud. I think it is more about technique and adequate scope.  Thanks so much for these videos!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IStream said:

Would love to see the effect, if any, of sharpening up the edge of that baby Mantis on it ability to get through a leaf of weed.

When I had trouble with weeds the other day,  the problem was not about penetration.  The leafs had simply collected around the base of the shank and prevented the anchor from diving into the seabed.  Mud on the toe of the anchor confirmed this.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, gn4478 said:

Great video! I am always amazed at people talking about how bad the CQR is. .................. We NEVER dragged. About 80% of the time, the anchor set on the first attempt. ...........

 

  I do trust a well dug in plow without question they are cheap effective and for a relatively low cost you can go up a couple of sizes. 

I think larger boats with bigger anchors of all types are less prone to a lot of the problems you'll see with their smaller brethren. 

For the budget oriented DIY types you could get inventive with smaller Plows to get better weight to holding/setting:

 

0713p39-wing-extensions.jpg.316c9a5853be41fa444cd7660c7f0d28.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, gn4478 said:

Great video! I am always amazed at people talking about how bad the CQR is. My dad got one in 1972 and we used it up until a few years ago when he donated his Bristol 40. I had one for 10 years on my own boat. We cruised from the Chesapeake bay to Maine. We anchored a lot. Always took care to set the anchor at about 5:1 scope with rope and chain, backed down in reverse at half power, felt the anchor skip, then set. We then usually put out 7:1. We NEVER dragged. About 80% of the time, the anchor set on the first attempt. Always was able to get it to set on a second or rarely a third. If it didn't set, it was usually fouled with weeds. We anchored during numerous squalls with winds up to 60 kn and wind shifts. NEVER dragged. Not once.  The bottoms were usually heavy sand and heavy thick mud. I think it is more about technique and adequate scope.  Thanks so much for these videos!

While there is no question that most yachtsmen used CQRs up until relatively recently, they are are also without question inferior to modern anchors or even authentic Bruce anchors.   I have certainly dragged with CQRs on several occasions, a few times quite dramatically with 7:1 scope.   While that’s certainly an issue, my main gripe with CQR’s is that anchoring with them is almost never as precise as you would want or need it to be.  What I like about modern types (and even the Bruce in mud/sand) is that they they set where want them to, mostly the first time.  This makes anchoring in tight areas possible.  With a CQR the anchor usually never sets where you really want it to, and that’s just too much of a compromise for me.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a CQR on our previous boat and were happy with it for 12 years.  I am happier with the big bloody Mantus on our current boat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, py26129 said:

We had a CQR on our previous boat and were happy with it for 12 years.  I am happier with the big bloody Mantus on our current boat. 

Saying anything negative about cqrs is kinda like picking on someones nice old grandparents... it's not their fault they are old.

They were fine when they were "it" but now they are light-years away from what's available.  

As long as they aren't dragging towards me anyone else can use whatever makes them happy.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, eliboat said:

While there is no question that most yachtsmen used CQRs up until relatively recently, they are are also without question inferior to modern anchors or even authentic Bruce anchors.   I have certainly dragged with CQRs on several occasions, a few times quite dramatically with 7:1 scope.   While that’s certainly an issue, my main gripe with CQR’s is that anchoring with them is almost never as precise as you would want or need it to be.  What I like about modern types (and even the Bruce in mud/sand) is that they they set where want them to, mostly the first time.  This makes anchoring in tight areas possible.  With a CQR the anchor usually never sets where you really want it to, and that’s just too much of a compromise for me.  

I think size makes a big difference.  I've noticed that larger (and heavier) anchors will set quickly where the same anchor type of a smaller size doesn't, especially in hard sand. The bigger anchor just dozers a mound and digs in where the lighter one skates on the surface.

The plow is still popular with commercial fishermen here who often anchor overnight in squally anchorages with squalls coming off the hills from all directions.  There have been quite a few name-brand fixed shank anchors replaced under guarantee after side bending the shanks. That might be getting rarer as makers seem to be shifting to higher strength steels for all their larger commercial anchors.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The shank on my older Supreme and my Manson Boss are noticeably thinner than the shank on the Vulcan. I agree that the new generation anchors are evolving rapidly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ajax said:

The shank on my older Supreme and my Manson Boss are noticeably thinner than the shank on the Vulcan. I agree that the new generation anchors are evolving rapidly.

Thin shanks help the anchor dive deep which gives the high holding power.  But that means it's poor for side loads.  Especially in rock and coral, the modern anchors are poor if the flukes get wedged so they cant follow the rode, then all thin shanks get bent when the wind changes regardless of material.  The anchor dealers will tell you they still replace a few each year but not as bad as it was a decade ago. Then they were  bending shanks in sand which shouldn't have happened. Manufacturers only proof testing inline not considering side loads which isn't required for approval.

  Rocnas had really weak mild steel shanks for a year or two circa 2010 from memory and were renown for bending. That'll probably become more common again for a period with 316 and Aluminium alloy shanks being introduced on the same pattern as the high strength steel anchors.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s a great video Steve, we have a 44lb Rocna on the V40, can’t wait for you to try it with holes in the blade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, olaf hart said:

That’s a great video Steve, we have a 44lb Rocna on the V40, can’t wait for you to try it with holes in the blade.

Me too.  We shouldn't get our hopes up.  Panope will go back into the shed on Friday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, olaf hart said:

That’s a great video Steve, we have a 44lb Rocna on the V40, can’t wait for you to try it with holes in the blade.

 

2 hours ago, Panope said:

Me too.  We shouldn't get our hopes up.  Panope will go back into the shed on Friday.

Just got off the phone with the owner of the Rocna.  He said do whatever you want to it - in the name of science.

Stay tuned.

Steve

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's really interesting and fits with my own experience with this anchor.

I sail on a friends boat sometimes, 40 foot ketch. His main anchor is a Rocna; twice in mud/sand bottoms it has released and dragged without resetting.  We were onboard the first time and I tested the set with full astern, pulled it out and it didn't reset and had to re-anchor.

The second time, we were all ashore the wind was strong, we had a good set, following a brief squall the boat was off and dragged and kept going, we watched it drag past, fortunately the wind was parallel to the shore. After capturing the boat we hauled the anchor up and there was a great clod of captive sea bed. I thought it was principally the roll bar causing the problem.  

The holes will break the suction which is how the mud sticks and at least if that allows it to self clear it'll reset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a Manson, which has never had trouble in the sandy mud of the northern Gulf.

but... I use far more scope. IMO,  short scope is 5:1.

I would be curious to see if the Rocna held if you used more scope. Maybe try that before cutting holes in it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Rocna test definitely spooked me. I've been considering replacing my 22lb Delta with a 22lb Rocna. Can't imagine a situation where I'd be moving over my anchor at 3kts but I'm definitely in anchorages where the wind shifts 180° at 15 knots both ways. Might just stick to the Delta until it's lost or look at the Vulcan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, climenuts said:

This Rocna test definitely spooked me. I've been considering replacing my 22lb Delta with a 22lb Rocna. Can't imagine a situation where I'd be moving over my anchor at 3kts but I'm definitely in anchorages where the wind shifts 180° at 15 knots both ways. Might just stick to the Delta until it's lost or look at the Vulcan.

Steve tests with very short scope. Just use what is normally accepted as good practice and you'll be fine.  (4:1 - 7:1)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Ajax said:

Steve tests with very short scope. Just use what is normally accepted as good practice and you'll be fine.  (4:1 - 7:1)

I normally anchor at 3:1, 4:1 if it's going to be windy. 5:1 is major wind.

7:1 around here  means you are stern-tied to shore, because you're not swinging with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ajax said:

Steve tests with very short scope. Just use what is normally accepted as good practice and you'll be fine.  (4:1 - 7:1)

Yeah, I'm usually aiming to have at least 4:1 at high water and I've got 200ft of chain which helps out - with less than 10kts I'm not pulling on the anchor at all anyway.

That being said the Delta has never failed me. Usually sets first time and holds 2000-2500 RPM no problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify: I'm aiming for 4:1 at high water in 25-40ft at high water. Once it's past 40ft I'm only putting out the 200ft of chain plus water depth in rope rode to minimize swinging unless it's blowing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Steve usually tests at 3:1. He'll correct me if I'm wrong. 

See,  around here 5:1 is like 25 feet of rode because the bay tributaries are so shallow. I only draw 4.5'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 15ft tides in the PNW make anchoring in 10-15ft at datum pretty interesting. You go from 5:1 to 2:1 or 5:1 to 10:1 pretty fast.

I've witnessed powerboats anchor on short scope in shallow water only to lift their anchors off the bottom at high tide :P

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, climenuts said:

The 15ft tides in the PNW make anchoring in 10-15ft at datum pretty interesting. You go from 5:1 to 2:1 or 5:1 to 10:1 pretty fast.

I've witnessed powerboats anchor on short scope in shallow water only to lift their anchors off the bottom at high tide :P

That's challenging and something I'll need to consider when I go to Maine where there are real tides. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ajax said:

That's challenging and something I'll need to consider when I go to Maine where there are real tides. 

You can just set for your desired scope at high water and desired depth at low water provided you have the space. Chain helps keep swinging manageable when you end up with 7 or 8:1 at low water and you don't want to wake up to adjust it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most places are tight so a good idea to see what everyone else is up too.  Proper scope only works if you are there first and have awsome bitch wings to fend em off.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ajax said:

I think Steve usually tests at 3:1. He'll correct me if I'm wrong. 

See,  around here 5:1 is like 25 feet of rode because the bay tributaries are so shallow. I only draw 4.5'.

With very rare exceptions, I test at 2.5 to 1, 3.5 to 1, and 5 to 1. 

Nothing sacred about those numbers.  

Steve

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, SASSAFRASS said:

Most places are tight so a good idea to see what everyone else is up too.  Proper scope only works if you are there first and have awsome bitch wings to fend em off.

there are plenty places where nobody else goes, or can go. The crowds are best avoided: not only for the sake of peace, but safety in that most pax have poor anchoring technique. Bitch wings never work so well as moving on or choosing solitude carefully.

 

1A4FF052-EB15-4007-BE82-091472FE668D.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Max Rockatansky said:

there are plenty places where nobody else goes, or can go. The crowds are best avoided: not only for the sake of peace, but safety in that most pax have poor anchoring technique. Bitch wings never work so well as moving on or choosing solitude carefully.

 

1A4FF052-EB15-4007-BE82-091472FE668D.jpeg

We definitely don't have what it takes and more or less follow the same plan as you.  I have seen people who could blister gelcoat all with a smile on.  "Anchoring here?  No no just wanted to see your beautiful boat..." We had someone row their dingy out in our way once when trying to get two hooks down right up to a breakwater out of the swell, definitely the least subtle approach.

 

I like Steve's short scope testing as it seems to make a very level playing field with not much chance on variables.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SASSAFRASS said:

I like Steve's short scope testing as it seems to make a very level playing field with not much chance on variables

Definitely. It also represents the most extreme use case.  If an anchor tests well at 3:1, it'll probably work even better at 5:1.

You really had someone row a dinghy in your way to prevent you from anchoring? Sheesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that I use 3/8" all chain (very heavy).  Catenary will NEVER be COMPLETELY eliminated.

Those who use mostly rope rode should consider this and assume that my 3.5:1 is roughly equivalent to perhaps 5:1.

Also, on some occasions, when I have conducted 180 degree reset testing with rope rode, the "rubber band effect" has caused anchors to travel (after releasing) at speeds much higher than my 3.5 knot boat speed. 

Steve

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the heavy chain catenary will be a factor with diminishing returns as the wind speed picks up. As the chain gets bar tight the effects are going to become negligible.

In every setting/resetting situation, tight anchorages, and in all light wind conditions it has major benefits which is worth the weight in my opinion.

Pulling off 200ft of 1/4" chain every time I race isn't fun but I sleep well while cruising.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Panope said:

Keep in mind that I use 3/8" all chain (very heavy).  Catenary will NEVER be COMPLETELY eliminated.

Those who use mostly rope rode should consider this and assume that my 3.5:1 is roughly equivalent to perhaps 5:1.

Also, on some occasions, when I have conducted 180 degree reset testing with rope rode, the "rubber band effect" has caused anchors to travel (after releasing) at speeds much higher than my 3.5 knot boat speed. 

Steve

 

Ah, that's very enlightening. I hadn't considered the effect of all chain and I didn't know your tests were all chain. I thought you used a mixed rode.

I have about 30 feet of 3/8 chain.  I'm considering increasing that to 50 feet just for a little more weight and chafe protection against underwater obstacles but I'll probably never go 100% chain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

18 hours ago, Ajax said:

............See,  around here 5:1 is like 25 feet of rode because the bay tributaries are so shallow. I only draw 4.5'.

Ajax, 

Note that I always include the height (above water) of my bow roller in my scope calculation.

It appears that you might not be doing this. 

Steve

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Panope said:

 

Ajax, 

Note that I always include the height (above water) of my bow roller in my scope calculation.

It appears that you might not be doing this. 

Steve

 

True, I rushed that statement and didn't include the bow roller. When I'm actually doing the anchoring, I factor it in. It's around 10 feet for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ajax said:

True, I rushed that statement and didn't include the bow roller. When I'm actually doing the anchoring, I factor it in. It's around 10 feet for me.

Your bow is 10' above the water?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Your bow is 10' above the water?

No, it's about 10 feet from the roller to the point where the rode enters the water.  It's 5' 5" from the roller to the water. I know this because I'm 5'11" and the roller was about at eye level when I stood in an inflatable dinghy at the bow.

I guess I was 5 feet generous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve pulled up my pick and found chunks of clay within the chain links, sometimes 10’ or more up my chain. From that, I’m guessing the pick dove well beneath the ‘ostensible’ surface. Very soft bottoms (heh-heh). This is why I mentioned the scope, as a longer scope would allow deeper diving, yes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites