Jump to content

Anchor Geekdom


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I think saw Q made the place a bit un-friendly. Who needs that?

When I started the anchor videos, it was just the underwater stuff and on-screen text.  Right away the accusations started flying that I was working for a particular anchor manufacturer.  Understandab

Posted Images

Max, the chart that you see up thread was for the "20 lb" anchors.  Despite all my efforts with craigslist sleuthing, I have yet to locate a Genuine Bruce in that size.

I have tested a 44lb. Genuine Bruce.  Here is that chart.

ncbcj2D.png

In the Cobblstone, all the anchors were marginal, but the Bruce, more so. 

Note that since producing this video, I have tested 2 other anchors here that raised the bar, somewhat:  45lb Mantus M2 and 51lb. Viking.

Skip to the 15:20 mark to watch the 44lb Bruce.

 

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

It depends on the seabed but I hope if you have storm forecast you move to a location with good holding.  If the storm is well forecast and the wind direction reliably predicted - use a Fortress, or whatever you carry that has the largest fluke area - as good holding implies sand or firm mud.  A Luke excels in weed and maybe stones and pebbles.  It has a small fluke area.  But if a storm is forecast you don't want to be anchoring in weed, or pebbles.

To call it a 'storm anchor' is a misnomer.

 

Do not be sucked in

Good point  - I used bad terminology.  But I figured it would be a good anchor to have for certain places/seabeds, especially as it’s easy to stow, in three pieces. I know of several boats that have successfully used them in high latitude cruises (southern: Chile, Antarctica., and northern: Svalbard), so it seems like a reasonable anchor to have on board?  It’s a real Luke, it’s heavy (75 lbs) for my size boat,  it was cheap, and it stows easily (and would also serve as a just-in-case back up).  
 

As to moving to a different type of seabed area if a storm is forecast with reliable information - sure, but that is certainly not always the case, depending on where one is (in which case some sort of extra, heavy anchor seems like a good idea to have?  Unfortunately, I can’t upsize my main/bower anchor on my roller instead - it’s a already a reasonably big anchor for the boat - so that’s the compromise, I guess.

As for the Fortress - indeed, I really should replace my 33 lb/15 kg Danforth (stern anchor/back up) with a big Fortress - presumably I could go a bit lighter, making it easier to manage/set (but still have big flukes?)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

Good point  - I used bad terminology.  But I figured it would be a good anchor to have for certain places/seabeds, especially as it’s easy to stow, in three pieces. I know of several boats that have successfully used them in high latitude cruises (southern: Chile, Antarctica., and northern: Svalbard), so it seems like a reasonable anchor to have on board?  It’s a real Luke, it’s heavy (75 lbs) for my size boat,  it was cheap, and it stows easily (and would also serve as a just-in-case back up).  
 

As to moving to a different type of seabed area if a storm is forecast with reliable information - sure, but that is certainly not always the case, depending on where one is (in which case some sort of extra, heavy anchor seems like a good idea to have?  Unfortunately, I can’t upsize my main/bower anchor on my roller instead - it’s a already a reasonably big anchor for the boat - so that’s the compromise, I guess.

As for the Fortress - indeed, I really should replace my 33 lb/15 kg Danforth (stern anchor/back up) with a big Fortress - presumably I could go a bit lighter, making it easier to manage/set (but still have big flukes?)

 

But is there any test evidence that suggests the 75-pound Luke is better than a 75-pound Mantus or Viking or Spade in rock or weed? They can hook too. And then there is the fouling downside. I actually think it is the opposite. More likely, the design is simply obsolete.

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

But is there any test evidence that suggests the 75-pound Luke is better than a 75-pound Mantus or Viking or Spade in rock or weed? They can hook too. And then there is the fouling downside. I actually think it is the opposite. More likely, the design is simply obsolete.

No.  No test data ready at hand.

I never claimed it was better than (or as good as) any other anchor.

It’s all a compromise.  It cost me $200 - cheap.  It’s been lightly used.  And it stows very easily (as a third anchor).  Lots of folks have used them over the years (which doesn’t prove anything, just saying that they’ve been used, apparently (?) successfully).  Overall, I was looking for a third anchor to have on board that would most likely work (chances are a 75lb Luke will work?) and, key, that I could stow on a 33’ boat.  That’s the kicker...no way would I be able to stow a big Mantus, Spade or Viking.

And so it is...in my imperfect world. :-)

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

Jud, in case you missed it, here is a recent video you may find relevant.  In addition to the 60 lb. Fisherman, I included clips from my (6 years old) 40lb Luke (COPY), and 100lb Fisherman tests.

Steve

 

 

You clearly have proven no one should anchor in that cobblestone bed!

 

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

Max, the chart that you see up thread was for the "20 lb" anchors.  Despite all my efforts with craigslist sleuthing, I have yet to locate a Genuine Bruce in that size.

I have tested a 44lb. Genuine Bruce.  Here is that chart.

ncbcj2D.png

In the Cobblstone, all the anchors were marginal, but the Bruce, more so. 

Note that since producing this video, I have tested 2 other anchors here that raised the bar, somewhat:  45lb Mantus M2 and 51lb. Viking.

Skip to the 15:20 mark to watch the 44lb Bruce.

 

Thank you @Panopethere was a fella here with several Bruce type anchors for sale, he left but may be back and if he shows I’ll see what he may have 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

 Overall, I was looking for a third anchor to have on board that would most likely work (chances are a 75lb Luke will work?

Ive been in at least one set of anchorage - along Australia south coast, Albany was a typical example - extremely hard sand - you could drive on the beach and not leave tire marks. where the only thing that seemed to work (for us, and the locals said the same) was heavy fisherman designs with sharpened flukes.  It was still not super secure with that anchor, but could at least hold thru 25kts, and  then dragged really really slowly, which was all we needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All anchors have strong and weak points, in terms of which seabeds they are best used.  Weight really does not come into it - if you are over a very hard sedimentary seabed you need a sharp toe (which is going to bend on rocks). Contradictorily - if you are anchor over rocks you need a sharp strong toe, so as to catch in any cracks - where it might be lodged and difficult to retrieve.  As thinwater says - the design is obsolete  - a small anchor will lodge in a crack in a rocky seabed as well as, maybe better, than a 75lb Luke.

 

What you carry will be determined by the likelihood of its use - carry a 75lb Luke for 'maybe' seems like a lot of weight for 'maybe' - but I too would be attracted if it was cheap.  But I would never call it a 'storm anchor'.  Its just 'an anchor' with very specific application - unlike most other anchors that can be used in a cross section of common seabeds

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, estarzinger said:

Ive been in at least one set of anchorage - along Australia south coast, Albany was a typical example - extremely hard sand - you could drive on the beach and not leave tire marks. where the only thing that seemed to work (for us, and the locals said the same) was heavy fisherman designs with sharpened flukes.  It was still not super secure with that anchor, but could at least hold thru 25kts, and  then dragged really really slowly, which was all we needed.

What is the “new wisdom” on anchors?  As big as you can fit?

Admittedly not having really looked a great deal into this earlier, over the years, I sized my anchors based on what Dave/Jaja Martin (who’ve cruised to the Arctic) did in their “sistership” to mine: (44 lb/20 kg Bruce [since snagged/lost, and replaced with same size Rocna] as main/bower anchor; 33 lb Danforth for stern anchor; and 75 lb Luke for higher latitudes kinda stuff (or whatever).  I reckoned they knew what they were doing...

I got the Luke recently since it was so cheap.  But maybe the better play would’ve been (something like) a somewhat larger Rocna (say, 25 instead of 20 kg) as a main/bower anchor, and a rather bigger Spade as a big back up/“storm” anchor - since they come apart (which I’d totally forgotten), making them easier to stow (a much bigger Spade likely wouldn’t fit on my roller, so at least having a big one below would be good?)

(Just checked Spade anchor costs...same size [20 kg] as my Rocna costs twice as much...that’s probably why I didn’t go for one, alas...at some point, I’ll be able to justify the cost!)

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

What is the “new wisdom” on anchors?  As big as you can fit?

put the extra weight into chain .

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

What is the “new wisdom” on anchors?  As big as you can fit?

I sized my anchors based on what Dave/Jaja Martin 

As I mentioned previously, Dave is a very competent seaman, following his lead is a solid path.

Anchors are complicated. Honestly IDK what is 'optimal'.  Steve's results are interesting,  add a new dimension to our knowledge, but not sure yet what to conclude  Personally I like really big, and steel, and seem to have good personal success with 'obsolete' designs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

No.  No test data ready at hand.

I never claimed it was better than (or as good as) any other anchor.

It’s all a compromise.  It cost me $200 - cheap.  It’s been lightly used.  And it stows very easily (as a third anchor).  Lots of folks have used them over the years (which doesn’t prove anything, just saying that they’ve been used, apparently (?) successfully).  Overall, I was looking for a third anchor to have on board that would most likely work (chances are a 75lb Luke will work?) and, key, that I could stow on a 33’ boat.  That’s the kicker...no way would I be able to stow a big Mantus, Spade or Viking.

And so it is...in my imperfect world. :-)

I've got what I think is an identical 75 lbs luke "storm" anchor on a similar sized steel boat (inherited if from the (experienced) PO together with a 44 lbs genuine Bruce main bower (since relegated to s backup)). Early on I added a 6 kg aluminium Vetus (A fortress style clone) kedge anchor, but to be honest, it's been a bit of a disappointment to date. I've had it fail to develop enough holding  to kedge me off in two estuary's/lagoons with soft mud bottoms (in its defense this was probably operator error as I had it set to the 37 degree angle, probably 45 degrees would have worked better). but I managed to get off with the luke anchor (even if it was a right pig to retrieve afterwards......).

A lightweight aluminum anchor is no doubt the ideal solution for all the sailing Einsteins with the optimum technique who only patronize the optimal anchorages. But for the bumbling idiots like me who are apt to anchor wherever is convenient, or where the snorkeling or the wifi is best, I suspect an oversize anchor, even if the design is "obsolete" helps to minimize the consequences of our poor choices in life.........  :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Mid said:

put the extra weight into chain .

Do you mean bigger chain, longer chain or both.  If you mean bigger (ie 3.8th" rather than 5/16th" - why?  Chain offers minimal hold compered to the anchor - if you are sceptical - take your anchor off, deploy the chain - and see where you are the following morning.  The next night anchor with a rope rode and an anchor and compared the difference in locations the following morning.

 

Maybe try the rope rode first and then you want need to end up on a beach (or rocks)

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

that

 

as in weight on the bow and chain on the sea floor

Many yachts don'r react too well with weight in the bow.  I recall Starzinger, many years ago on 'another' forum, was a great advocate of using snubbers - which are said to 'replace' lots of chain.

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

Many yachts don'r react too well with weight in the bow.  I recall Starzinger, many years ago on 'another' forum, was a great advocate of using snubbers - which are said to 'replace' lots of chain.

Who doesn’t use as a snubber?  I always have.  Both to prevent the windlass getting wrecked, as well as help take shock loads off the anchor system.  (Guess some folks use, what are they called, chain stoppers?  I can’t fit one on my boat.)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

Who doesn’t use as a snubber?  I always have.  Both to prevent the windlass getting wrecked, as well as help take shock loads off the anchor system.  (Guess some folks use, what are they called, chain stoppers?  I can’t fit one on my boat.)

 

 

Sometimes I don't use a snubber.  In a really quiet anchorage with plenty of all chain scope let out I don't see the need.  If it's windy and waves might be coming in, then I'll always use a snubber.   Simple 3/4" 3 strand nylon with a chain hook on one end.   

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

Sometimes I don't use a snubber.  In a really quiet anchorage with plenty of all chain scope let out I don't see the need.  If it's windy and waves might be coming in, then I'll always use a snubber.   Simple 3/4" 3 strand nylon with a chain hook on one end.   

I always use a snubber when I have chain coming over the roller, makes the sleep much quieter. Ours is 7/16" 3-strand, it stretches about 50% when I set the anchor.

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

put the extra weight into chain

Put any extra weight into the anchor

1 hour ago, eliboat said:

Simple 3/4" 3 strand nylon with a chain hook on one end.   

That's too big unless you are anchoring a BIG boat. You want skinny rope that stretches and reduces the shock loads of gusts/veering. I used 10mm climbing rope on a bridle and it held in very strong winds. It would stretch lots.

And a snubber has to be LONG. Like more than the 5' or 8' I see some people use. Stretch is GOOD. You want to dissipate the load over a longer time to reduce the load on the anchor.

 

15 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Ours is 7/16" 3-strand, it stretches about 50% when I set the anchor.

Only slight exaggeration. Marlow ropes says  " Nylon will stretch by about 20% at 50% of its breakload, "

So unless you're regularly breaking ropes in reverse it might not be stretching quite that much.

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

Hmmm…. My 30 footer only has a 4 pound aluminum Fortress with no chain at all. I’m probably not welcome in this conversation!  :D

I've anchored a ULDB the same , trouble is they sail in the slightest puff when anchored .

 

now if I could just get 'em to do that when not anchored ......

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The other problem with relying on long chain - you need room to deploy it.

Better putting your money into a better, not bigger, anchor and long snubber.  

And, sadly - lots of people don't use a snubber, or only use a snubber about 5' long (which takes the tension off the windlass and stops the chain rattling on the bow roller - but does no snubbing (another misnomer).

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Monkey said:

Hmmm…. My 30 footer only has a 4 pound aluminum Fortress with no chain at all. I’m probably not welcome in this conversation!  :D

According to the heavy chain brigade, you are already dead

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

Put any extra weight into the anchor

That's too big unless you are anchoring a BIG boat. You want skinny rope that stretches and reduces the shock loads of gusts/veering. I used 10mm climbing rope on a bridle and it held in very strong winds. It would stretch lots.

And a snubber has to be LONG. Like more than the 5' or 8' I see some people use. Stretch is GOOD. You want to dissipate the load over a longer time to reduce the load on the anchor.

 

Only slight exaggeration. Marlow ropes says  " Nylon will stretch by about 20% at 50% of its breakload, "

So unless you're regularly breaking ropes in reverse it might not be stretching quite that much.

Well, OK. Maybe a little overstated. It certainly seems like a lot when you're standing there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

Every society, since the Dawn of Time, needs heretics: they drive progress!! :-) 

Heretics do indeed drive progress.  But usually only after they have been made into a good bonfire

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

According to the heavy chain brigade, you are already dead

I know!  I just figured this thread could use a little humor. I’ll get a slightly bigger anchor for the distance races, rather than the rules compliant decoration. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Monkey said:

I know!  I just figured this thread could use a little humor. I’ll get a slightly bigger anchor for the distance races, rather than the rules compliant decoration. 

If it makes you feel better we use webbing and plastic chain on a Choate 27 with a small Alu danforth. Works well enough on the Columbia River for those light air days you get swept past the mark at 2-3 knots or need to anchor up-tide of the start line. 

Personally I think the webbing idea is a pretty clever one - light and compact, quick to deploy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice diversion, Steve. I doubt many of us own or are considering a Forfjord but it was interesting to see how one of those big monsters performs. 

And that schooner! I practically swooned watching her glide by in the background.

I'll also say that I'm intrigued by those small Mantus quick connect anchors like the one you showed at the end. They're pricy but seem to be a great alternative to a Fortress as a stern/backup anchor. That said, the risk of bending the roll bar while using one as an emergency backup primary or as a kedge on a big boat gives me pause. I wonder if Mantus has plans for some new quick connect models based on the M2 pattern.

Speaking of the M2, I finally got to use the 65lb M2 I bought to replace my 85lb M1 up in Westcott Bay. With my typical 4:1 scope and all-chain rode, it set beautifully and was actually harder to dislodge than my M1 typically was. I wonder if the smaller shovel and newer design was better at burying itself during the set because it certainly seemed like there was more surface area under the mud. Anyway, I'm just at N=1 so nothing more than an anecdote and hypothesis at this point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Istream, 

Ya, the Mantus Dinghy anchor is a standout.  Not sure it will scale up well as the stainless steel is quite bendy.

I (half) joke about a "Jordan Series Anchor", where a strong, floating rode (to minimize entanglements) has a dozen or more Mantus Dinghy Anchors attached with thier own pennants.  The potential for tangles would be huge, but like a shotgun blast, at least a few anchors will hit the target.  

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

They're pricy

Wow.  Just checked.  USD$566 for a 13 lb anchor.  Ok, it’s stainless, so will never rust away :-)

(I’ll have to go look through Steve’s incredible archive of films in his vault to see what the story is with the stainless folding/disassembling Pekny anchor [which I got for pennies some years ago, just out of curiosity, perhaps as an “anchor of last resort” to stow aboard as third anchor].  Now *that* is a lawn sculpture, a piece of metal fabrication art! :-) )

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/1/2021 at 2:48 PM, Zonker said:

And a snubber has to be LONG. Like more than the 5' or 8' I see some people use. Stretch is GOOD. You want to dissipate the load over a longer time to reduce the load on the anchor.

Energy absorption is what a snubber is all about, and the energy absorption of a spring is proportional to the length displacement squared, so 10' will absorb 4x the energy of 5'. 

I use 8 plait as it behaves itself better than 3 strand, if it is looking like a rough night I put out at least 30'. 

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

Energy absorption is what a snubber is all about, and the energy absorption of a spring is proportional to the length squared, so 10' will absorb 4x the energy of 5'. 

I use 8 plait as it behaves itself better than 3 strand, if it is looking like a rough night I put out at least 30'. 

Good to know.  When I first had a snubber bridle spliced for me 10 years ago, I was advised to have it long enough to reach my  cockpit if need be.  I didn’t get it made that long.  It worked to Alaska and back just fine, but there were a few times I wished I could’ve paid out a bit more...It needs replacing soon - I’ll make up a much longer one this time.

I like the idea of using 8 plait, although I don’t know anything about ropes other than 3-strand and standard double braid.  If it behaves easier than stuff three strand (especially when it gets old and stiffer), I’m in.

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

Istream, 

Ya, the Mantus Dinghy anchor is a standout.  Not sure it will scale up well as the stainless steel is quite bendy.

I (half) joke about a "Jordan Series Anchor", where a strong, floating rode (to minimize entanglements) has a dozen or more Mantus Dinghy Anchors attached with thier own pennants.  The potential for tangles would be huge, but like a shotgun blast, at least a few anchors will hit the target.  

I like the "distributed tackle" concept!

I was actually thinking of the 13 pounder, nothing bigger, as a stern anchor/overkill dinghy anchor which could be used as a primary in a pinch, like a situation where you had to cut the main anchor loose but still needed to anchor (in calm conditions) before you could arrange for a primary replacement. 

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

I was actually thinking of the 13 pounder, nothing bigger, as a stern anchor/overkill dinghy anchor which could be used as a primary in a pinch, like a situation where you had to cut the main anchor loose but still needed to anchor (in calm conditions) before you could arrange for a primary replacement. 

A comparison test between the 13lb. Stainless "Quick connect" Mantus and the standard a 13lb. Galvanized M1 is needed.

Assuming the Quick Connect version performs better, I would point toward the thinner (solid) rollbar, and lack of the "bolt graveyard" sticking up at the shank base, as possible explanations.

Also, I think Stainless Steel tends to be smoother than galvanizing, further boosting performance.

But, unless the 13lb. version is scaled up/beefed up differently than the Dinghy version, I predict your (25,000lb ?) boat will twist it into a pretzel.

Steve

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

I was actually thinking of the 13 pounder, nothing bigger, as a stern anchor/overkill dinghy anchor which could be used as a primary in a pinch, like a situation where you had to cut the main anchor loose but still needed to anchor (in calm conditions) before you could arrange for a primary replacement. 

If you ever have to cut the main anchor loose you might NOT be in calm conditions. I'd make sure the backup anchor is well suited to steady strong winds i.e. a Danforth style that maybe doesn't do well with wind shifts but has high (holding power / lb) and (high holding power / $)

I think a 13 lb anchor as a decent backup for a 30' boat but nothing much bigger.

I think the smoothness of the anchor surface does not matter to any measurable degree. Both will penetrate the bottom adequately. Stainless anchors are nuts IMO. Good for big powerboats that never anchor and just want some shiny boat jewelry on the bow.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

I like the idea of using 8 plait, although I don’t know anything about ropes other than 3-strand and standard double braid.  If it behaves easier than stuff three strand (especially when it gets old and stiffer), I’m in.

8 plait stretches as much or more than 3 strand, does not hockle and coils or even piles very compactly. It also has no torque so won't wind up your anchor chain under tension. Yale and NE sells it. It is pretty easy to eye splice or splice onto a chain, not much harder than 3 strand. 

A length of nylon line acts like a spring more or less. If you stretch a spring twice as far it will take 2x the energy to do it, plus another 2x because the spring resists more and more as it is stretched further. The physics of springs say that if it is twice as long the spring constant (stiffness or resistance) will be 1/2. You give back that second 2x in energy if that makes any sense. So given a size of line, if you double the length it will absorb twice as much energy by the time you get to the same resisting force. Doing this from memory so I hope I got that right. Of course you have to remember to leave that much slack in the chain. 

I've made up my snubbers from 1/2" 8 plait 50' long with a good SS chain hook eye spliced on the end. 3/8 or 7/16 might be better for my boat (~30,000 lbs) as it would stretch more, but it is harder on the hands to handle. 

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

But, unless the 13lb. version is scaled up/beefed up differently than the Dinghy version, I predict your (25,000lb ?) boat will twist it into a pretzel.

Yeah, you're probably right, damn it.

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

If you ever have to cut the main anchor loose you might NOT be in calm conditions. I'd make sure the backup anchor is well suited to steady strong winds i.e. a Danforth style that maybe doesn't do well with wind shifts but has high (holding power / lb) and (high holding power / $)

I think a 13 lb anchor as a decent backup for a 30' boat but nothing much bigger.

I think the smoothness of the anchor surface does not matter to any measurable degree. Both will penetrate the bottom adequately. Stainless anchors are nuts IMO. Good for big powerboats that never anchor and just want some shiny boat jewelry on the bow.

 

I should clarify that I'm talking about a summer vacation "crisis" rather than a safety at sea kinda situation. That is, the anchor gets jammed under a rock so it can't be gotten out easily but you don't want to cut the vacation short to deal with it immediately so you check the forecast, see light winds and calm weather for the next week, and you meander your way back to civilization over a few days, dropping the backup hook at night.

The main use for the thing under normal circumstances would be as a dinghy anchor or to deploy off the stern when required in addition to the primary off the bow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For a stunt, The owner of the 80 ton fishing vessel and I will attempt to anchor his boat with the 3.25 pound Mantus Dinghy anchor. 

I have added one of my dyneema "rollbar helper" straps, so it should stay together.  Might even hold more as an upright rollbar may add some resistance.  

I've already done stunt this with Panope (7 ton) in 15 knots.  At the time this seemed remarkable, but now that I know it's ultimate holding, this was not much of a challenge.

Steve

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DDW said:

8 plait stretches as much or more than 3 strand, does not hockle and coils or even piles very compactly. It also has no torque so won't wind up your anchor chain under tension. Yale and NE sells it. It is pretty easy to eye splice or splice onto a chain, not much harder than 3 strand. 

A length of nylon line acts like a spring more or less. If you stretch a spring twice as far it will take 2x the energy to do it, plus another 2x because the spring resists more and more as it is stretched further. The physics of springs say that if it is twice as long the spring constant (stiffness or resistance) will be 1/2. You give back that second 2x in energy if that makes any sense. So given a size of line, if you double the length it will absorb twice as much energy by the time you get to the same resisting force. Doing this from memory so I hope I got that right. Of course you have to remember to leave that much slack in the chain. 

I've made up my snubbers from 1/2" 8 plait 50' long with a good SS chain hook eye spliced on the end. 3/8 or 7/16 might be better for my boat (~30,000 lbs) as it would stretch more, but it is harder on the hands to handle. 

I've worried about chain hooks damaging chain, or becoming jammed in the chain. I have no evidence or experience of either of these things ever happening. As a result I tend to tie the snubber. The only problem with this is I'm usually the only person on the boat who can tie a rolling hitch.

Has anyone got any experience of a chain hook damaging a chain? Should I just get over it?

Agree that the snubber should be long and light to give as much stretch as possible.

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

I've worried about chain hooks damaging chain, or becoming jammed in the chain. I have no evidence or experience of either of these things ever happening. As a result I tend to tie the snubber. The only problem with this is I'm usually the only person on the boat who can tie a rolling hitch.

Has anyone got any experience of a chain hook damaging a chain? Should I just get over it?

Agree that the snubber should be long and light to give as much stretch as possible.

Chain hooks are designed to take the load without damaging the chain, provided they are matched to the size of the chain. However I have always worried about the 'dropping off' although it seems unlikely. I really like Evans Starzinger's approach of using a soft shackle to attach the snubber to the rode.

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Jim in Halifax said:

Chain hooks are designed to take the load without damaging the chain, provided they are matched to the size of the chain. However I have always worried about the 'dropping off' although it seems unlikely. I really like Evans Starzinger's approach of using a soft shackle to attach the snubber to the rode.

You're right, that probably is the answer. The rolling hitch can be a bit of a sod to untie sometimes.

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

I know, you're all talking sense. I was just hoping to get away with one fewer anchors...

I just randomly came across this the other day, can’t recall how (was looking up something after trading a post here.)  

WTF?  

We carry eight anchors on our 31’ boat, plus the dinghy anchor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jim in Halifax said:

Chain hooks are designed to take the load without damaging the chain, provided they are matched to the size of the chain. I really like Evans Starzinger's approach of using a soft shackle to attach the snubber to the rode.

I must’ve missed Evans’ mention of this - I’m always ready to look at new and better ways of doing things.

What’s this about soft shackles to attach the snubber to the rode? 

Not knowing anything else about this (using a soft shackle instead if a chain hook), one thing I like is that it seems like a very simple thing to replace (vs. having to carry a replacement chain hook should it distort or break under load...which I don’t want to imagine, but I’m sure it’s happened).

On my boat, tying/untying a rolling hitch would be a bit of a pain —I.e., b/c access to the rode near the roller is a bit “tight”.  Slipping on/off the chain hook is dead easy.  I suspect attaching a soft shackle would be somewhere in between.

EDIT: oooh, I like this.  A very quick google search a minute after posting the above brought me this, below, from an esteemed local author, it seems :-) 

http://maiaaboard.blogspot.com/2014/07/a-better-anchor-snubber.html?m=1. Thanks for this, crew of Ceilydh!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jud - s/v Sputnik said:

What’s this about soft shackles to attach the snubber to the rode? 

Yea, by far my preferred way to hook on the snubber.

Runs in and out over the roller perfectly (unlike many metal ones) so you can connect it on deck rather than have to lean out over the bow.  It never accidentally slips nor disconnects.  Is light and textile so not banging or clanging or rust.  As you say is DIY so you can (easily) make if you lose one and can make perfect size and length.  I tried basically all the available hooks and gripper knots at some point and the soft shackle seemed a very clear winner.

This is one of the few applications where it is definitely preferred to used one of the 'stronger' (eg burried tail) designs - that allows you to use cord size which will easily fit thru the chain links while still being strong as the chain (the 'normal' soft shackle designs using cord the size to fit thru the chain links would still be quite strong, probably strong enough, but would be a potential weak link)

related to the conversation about snubber rope - 8 plait is good, but we preferred dynamic climbing line - really nice and stretchy with a very tough jacket.  If expecting 'ultimate' bad conditions (like sitting a hurricane out) there is some merit to having a beefy section of dyneema in the snubber just in the section where it leads out over the boat edge, this minimizes the potential for failure due to chafe.  There is an article somewhere about the various design iterations of my snubber design.

A bit of a 'funny' story about our snubber evolution . . . . when we were double handing Beth would be on the bow dropping the anchor and setting the snubber. We used a conventional 3 strand with conventional metal chain hook. She always made it look easy and never complained.  When I started single handing, about the 2nd time I did it, I said to myself 'this sucks, there has to be a better way' - and started iterating on the connection and snubber designs until I got one that I felt was much easier and better.  Made me realize that 'the skipper' really should rotate thru all the jobs :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Silly question: How does one attach the soft shackle to the dynamic climbing rope? Can those be spliced? 

My wife is a bit less experienced and tiny, so I put her on the helm for evolutions and I'm the deck monkey. That also made sure our hand signals were down pat. For example a raised middle finger means, "It's FUBAR, try again starting from the approach". 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A proper chain hook will hold to the breaking strength of G40 chain. It will also easily go over the bow roller both directions (unless perhaps, you have a tiny bow roller). I'm not sure under what conditions it would come off if rigged properly, I've never had that happen. It is *much* faster to hook and unhook than a soft shackle, literally takes 1 second. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of a captive snubber attachment.  If you get stuck on a lee shore and thing go to shit in a hurry it's one more thing to mess with while trying to get under way.  If you are sitting for weeks-months in a spot that is good then a soft shackle is a better way to go than having a SS hook on your steel chain for sure.  Otherwise always like the SS chain hook, super simple and easy to put on take off.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SASSAFRASS said:

I'm not a fan of a captive snubber attachment.  If you get stuck on a lee shore and thing go to shit in a hurry it's one more thing to mess with while trying to get under way.  If you are sitting for weeks-months in a spot that is good then a soft shackle is a better way to go than having a SS hook on your steel chain for sure.  Otherwise always like the SS chain hook, super simple and easy to put on take off.

I can cut a soft shackle very quickly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, European Bloke said:

I can cut a soft shackle very quickly. 

 Very true, almost said as much in the post. For me adding a knife in the mix for your oh shit program is not really a plus though. A soft shackle is definitely many steps up from some of the SS contraptions you see, but I still like a simple rated chain hook.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being in a hurry almost (not quite) always means you failed to plan. I have left places "in a hurry" before, but never such that a few minutes mattered. The only obvious exceptions are rapid dragging with little space and someone dragging into me. But 30 seconds to do the thing right will never make any difference. Breath.

Obviously, any textile snubber attachment will come off in less than 30 seconds with a knife. Textile attachments can be recovered over the roller, onto the foredeck where they are easy to remove (not leaning out). Any hook will come off in seconds once the tension is off and not before. Note: I have seen hooks that would not easily come off a tensioned chain: obviously these are not acceptable.

I would love to read data and experiences re. a metal connector damaging a chain. In principle...

  • A snubber is weaker and has a shorter fatigue life than the chain. It is disposable.
  • The snubber load should NEVER be more than the WLL of the chain, even in the most extreme storm. That is the purpose of the snubber. If this is not true, the snubber rope is too fat/strong for the job. And surely, the anchor will drag first in most cases.
  • Although a hook will often (exceptions) cause the chain to break at lower load, that does NOT mean it has lowered the WLL.  One of the reasons is that the hook will not be on the same link often. Data is lacking on this point.

Where does the chain most often break? First, chains very, very seldom break unless rusted past all good sense. Possibly, the boat got caught in the impact zone with no snubber, so something will break, often several things, including the roller system. But I suspect the chain will fail at the anchor shackle, where there is more corrosion and motion/wear. The few (two) mooring chains I have known to let go did so right there. Possible some sort of bind as well.

IMO, the best connector is one that works well with your roller/bow/chain geometry. It's the one you will use. There are several approaches I am equally happy with. Personally, I cannot use a plain hook, because it is common for the bridle apex to lie on the bottom in slack wind and the hook will come off. Not guessing, it has happened to me a number of times, even using passive semi-locking designs. But that is an issue specific to long bridles/snubbers in shallow water.

 

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

Silly question: How does one attach the soft shackle to the dynamic climbing rope? Can those be spliced? 

My wife is a bit less experienced and tiny, so I put her on the helm for evolutions and I'm the deck monkey. That also made sure our hand signals were down pat. For example a raised middle finger means, "It's FUBAR, try again starting from the approach". 

Have a look at the link I posted above - or perhaps the author will chime in here.  (He knows what he’s talking about...)

Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, thinwater said:

 

IMO, the best connector is one that works well with your roller/bow/chain geometry. It's the one you will use. 

 

That pretty much sums it up.  It's great to hear what others are doing to expand your knowledge base, but at the end of the day most boats and crew will have their own unique program.  It was a big eye opener for us when we got hit with a freak squall on the "safe" side of a island. About 5 min from flat calm to 50kts pushing us on the beach and 15' seas.  It was a rare regional wx phenomenon that we learned how to identify. But with anything boating as soon as you think you have it all figured out you will get your ass handed to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All or most hooks from the lifting industry are made and sold to a strength specification, G40, G60, G70, G80, G100 and even G120.  Take your choice, strength is simply not questionable.

Most if not all lifting hooks are sold with the comment: this, or these, hooks will not impact the strength of the chain and can be used with loads upto the rated strength of the chain.

If you look at hooks commonly sold in chandlers the lifting industry would laugh and would not, ever , use them.  They commonly have sharp edges in the jaw, Suncorp the early Mantus hook, that are the cause of reducing chain strength and could, if nothing else, damage the galvanising on the chain.

Lifting hooks cost peanut, chandler hooks cost more.

Lifting hooks are made so that they only accept the size of chain appropriate - unlike chandler hooks where often chains of different size can be used.  Most chandler hooks have been reported to bend in use, Oscalutti and Witchard being guilty.  They don't break they simply distort and the chain falls out.

The downside to lifting hooks is that they are commonly not galvanised and you have to search for hooks that will not rust - or buy 2 use one till it rusts and replace.  Ketten and Walder have a nice G60 Duplex eye hook in their Cromox range, though I suspect it costs.

If you are using climbing rope, kermantle - simply sew an eye.  3, 8 or 12 strand nylon, splice an eye or use a halyard knot (though the latter is a bit bulky).

Dyneema soft shackle is easier to cut under tension - but when you get it over the bow roller (which is mentioned as the reason to use a soft shackle) the dyneema will be slack - and I have never found it easy to cut.  Hooks, unless you have a very small bow roller - will fit and the hook falls of, easily.

You should be using a long snubber every time you anchor - you don't always know what is brewing over the hill behind which you are sheltering.  The snubber is used for its elasticity not the strength of the chain.  If its as strong as the chain and or short it will not offer the required elasticity.  An everyday snubber will not be good enough for a 45 knot storm - you should have a storm snubber and be able to rig it, quickly, without the need to retrieve the everyday snubber.  Because the everyday snubber is not 'strong' it will wear and will fail - its sacrificial (like your sails).  It is easy to know when you need new sails - snubbers are more difficult - you should carry a spare.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, DDW said:

. It will also easily go over the bow roller both directions (unless perhaps, you have a tiny bow roller). I'm not sure under what conditions it would come off if rigged properly,

I would be curious what is involved in 'rigged properly'  . .  .because none of this has been true on my boats, but perhaps I have not been 'rigging them properly'?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, Elegua said:

Silly question: How does one attach the soft shackle to the dynamic climbing rope? Can those be spliced? 

well, two options - (a) properly with a sewn eye.  There are actually splices which will work, but they are not 'easy' to make well and generally not recommended.  (b) just a figure 8 loop - not 'properly' (less strong), but I used it for quite a while (including thru the edge of a hurricane) and it never suggested it might break - chafe was always the failure mode which was why I started putting the dyneema section in where it lead over the boat edge.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Which part? I can hook the chain and run it over the roller with no difficulty whatever. My bow roller is perhaps bigger than average, but it even worked on the tiny little roller that came on the trawler (since replaced with a larger one). 

If there is significant chain hanging on the hook, and sufficient slack bight of chain above it, the hook will not come off in my experience. I suppose as ThinH20 says above, if the hook is lying on the bottom then bets are off - I never have had that occur as I would not put out enough snubber line to allow it to happen. Never had to on the whole length of the east coast, and on the west coast the water is deeper than your snubber is likely to be. 

Under what circumstances did you have a proper chain hook come off?

Not talking about the ones made for boats, most of which are abysmal designs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DDW said:

Which part? I can hook the chain and run it over the roller with no difficulty whatever. My bow roller is perhaps bigger than average, but it even worked on the tiny little roller that came on the trawler (since replaced with a larger one). 

If there is significant chain hanging on the hook, and sufficient slack bight of chain above it, the hook will not come off in my experience. I suppose as ThinH20 says above, if the hook is lying on the bottom then bets are off - I never have had that occur as I would not put out enough snubber line to allow it to happen. Never had to on the whole length of the east coast, and on the west coast the water is deeper than your snubber is likely to be. 

Under what circumstances did you have a proper chain hook come off?

Not talking about the ones made for boats, most of which are abysmal designs. 

You said 'if rigged properly' - so I would like to know how you rigged the hook to make it proper please?  Did you mouse the opening or something?

We had hooks come off lying on the bottom, and fiddling with them (getting them on the chain) out in front of the bow.

We had decent size rollers - fit for 120lb anchors, and it would never have been smooth or nice to run a hook on the chain over them

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

No, no mousing or anything, not what I intended to convey. Yes, you have to keep a small amount of tension on them or they will drop off, and I would never rely on them sitting on the bottom. A snubber can stretch quite a lot in surge, there has to be chain slack to accommodate or it will come off. 

Have you tried running the chain hook over the roller? it actually only needs to be done in the down direction, coming up I pull the snubber in but let it go slack once it is near the bowsprit and it drops off. I have also just run it back over the roller, no problem either.

Perhaps one X factor is how easy it is to operate your windlass while tending to the snubber line, as you have to have one hand free for that. On the sailboat, a wireless remote makes it easy, the powerboat has the foot buttons which is OK too, though actually not quite as easy.

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

Have you tried running the chain hook over the roller?

Beth tried, and gave up, and hooked it on the chain over the bow.

Perhaps one X factor is how easy it is to operate your windlass while tending to the snubber line

Yea, we had foot switches set back quite a ways from the bow (to keep the chain aft some distance) and the geometry of using a switch while keeping tension on the snubber over the roller would not have been great.  It was fine to keep tension once out past the roller because there was no discontinuity (like bumping the roller)

The soft shackle was just so nice and smooth to use and easy and 100% secure.  There is no need to 'tend' it or keep tension on it, or pay it any attention at all when you are raising or lowering.  :)

as an aside - re strength - 3/8" g4 has a break strength of around 1600lbs, while a 6mm (which fits nicely thru the chain links) HTS 'stronger' soft shackle is around 22,000lbs.  They dont take any meaningful UV but do wear a bit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only time we have ever had a hook come off was in the aquatic center in SF. Tide against wind was nuts rode straight to the stern.  We were still rigging to both hause holes then too.  Now just off bow roller mid bow sprit.  Usually have several feet of chain slack as well so the hook is weighted on both sides.  Powering down hard on the hook with the brake off usually pulls the right amount of chain out so when the wind comes way up the subber is still carrying all the load.  No thimble just spliced to hook so it all rides out and in easy.  I like the foot switch as I can tend snubber coming in easy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the chain hook got turned so the eye was sideways or underneath I suppose it might hang on the roller more. I can and do stand pretty much over the top of the roller or close to it, the tension on the snubber keeps the hook itself down, goes over the roller without any trouble. I'm sure the soft shackle works great, but so does the chain hook, at least in my circumstance on two very different boats. 

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

...Under what circumstances did you have a proper chain hook come off?....

I'll give you one simple case. Multihulls use bridles long enough that the apex will touch the bottom if they anchor in shallow water. If a plain hook rests on the bottom in slack wind and tide, it WILL come off, not every time, but about one on 3-4. This is specifically problematical in soft mud, which will "lift" it off just like your fingers. There is no rigging solution that will change that other than a locking hook. The same will happen to any long snubber if it rests on the bottom.

This has happened to me multiple times. I repeated the conditions for testing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you commence your snubber at the transom, where you have large and load bearing horn cleats, and then feed over the bow you have a deck length snubber + , say, 3' - 6' beyond, so deck length plus 3'-6'

This will never touch the bottom (and the chain fall off).

If your snubber is, sensibly, longer than deck length and you take to a turning block on the transom (spinnaker block) and feed to a winch - you now have 3'-6' forward of the bow, plus, say, 3'-6' to the cockpit located winch + however much extra you need - say 30'-50'.  You now have a 'real' snubber, or bridle if you rig this on a multi.  It cannot touch the seabed - as if you deploy more  - you only do so because the snubber is under tension.  If the winds ease you simple take in on the winch (which you can complete in comfort and dry - as you  are in the cockpit).

This is good for, say 45 knots, - now the winds pick up - winch the whole lot in until it is at the bow roller, go to the bow and add your storm snubber (or bridle) and deploy.  You now have 2 snubbers all under control and relatively easy to manage.

The hook cannot fall of - because the hook is never near the seabed, either its near the bow (because the deck length + + is enough) or its 50' forward because you have deployed all your snubber because its blowing 55 knots.

 

You don't need to go into contortions to secure the hook - it does what it is meant to do.

Just think like De Bono.

 

Sorry for those who want to burn the books and have me on 'reject' or 'ignore' - sad really.  

Don't shoot the messenger

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Slightly different for a Multihull.  Use screecher blocks instead of spinnaker blocks.  You need to alter the bow arrangement - you need turning blocks on the bow to accept the bridle arms running from the hook to the bow located turning blocks and then to the transom.

 

But anyone with a modicum of skill and imagination could rig the system.

 

Its a slightly longer minimum bridle as it is deck length + the distance from the bow to the hook as a triangle.  And then whatever length extra you want down at the transom.

 

So there is a rigging solution that gives the answer - no need for a lock on the hook - the hook will not fall off - as there is never the need for it to touch the bottom.

 

Think outside the box - don't burn books

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, thinwater said:

'll give you one simple case. Multihulls use bridles long enough that the apex will touch the bottom if they anchor in shallow water. If a plain hook rests on the bottom in slack wind and tide, it WILL come off, not every time, but about one on 3-4.

Yes, me too. We switched to a soft shackle. Bridle was used climbing rope with a thimble sewn/seized in the middle. Slightly longer to rig/de-rig but never came off. 

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

you need turning blocks on the bow to accept the bridle arms running from the hook to the bow located turning blocks and then to the transom.

That seems like you'd have a difficult time getting a fair lead with the bow blocks. Do these blocks get built like a bow roller to avoid chafing the line as it runs over the deck edge?

I want the bridle angle to be a shallow included angle so it keeps the boat pointed into the wind best. Like this:

 

image.png.f8ac4fe640c58fa9bf0ab6c6764d4be6.png

Not like this. This is more likely to oscillate.

 

image.png.1bd5b3e0f4222695212d196c72a2c81a.png

Even if I had rigged it the way you suggest the centerline of our bows were 17' apart. That means 8.5' to center. Naturally you don't want the bridles to be at 90 degree to the boat. They must be longer than 8.5'. Which means they hit the bottom in 9' of water, which we did anchor in.

 

The boat ends of our bridles were attached to padeyes under the deck edge, on the inboard side of the hull. Zero chance of chafing. These padeyes were very skookum, and were sized to also attach a parachute sea anchor bridle.

This is the connection. The ugly chunky seizing protects the lighter line inner seizing from chafing on the bottom. It was made with thin cheap nylon and was sacrificial.

image.png.a576c4238f35cc662eb7d0f2539d0a15.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are perhaps two ways to approach this - my thinking was:

(a) chain hooks clearly have a potential failure mode(s) (eg falling off the chain).  You can minimize the occurrence of that failure with technique and procedure (eg tending the snubber tension, not letting it sit on the bottom, always making sure there is sufficient chain loop on both sides of the hook, etc).  We did that for slightly shy of 20 years and yea it can be made to work.

(b) but why not have a system which entirely does away with that failure mode? The soft shackle accomplicates that. You can connect it on the foredeck and then don't need to pay it any further special attention.  Having used both systems, for me at least the soft shackle was a clear winner.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Zonker said:

That seems like you'd have a difficult time getting a fair lead with the bow blocks. Do these blocks get built like a bow roller to avoid chafing the line as it runs over the deck edge?

I want the bridle angle to be a shallow included angle so it keeps the boat pointed into the wind best. Like this:

 

image.png.f8ac4fe640c58fa9bf0ab6c6764d4be6.png

Not like this. This is more likely to oscillate.

 

image.png.1bd5b3e0f4222695212d196c72a2c81a.png

Even if I had rigged it the way you suggest the centerline of our bows were 17' apart. That means 8.5' to center. Naturally you don't want the bridles to be at 90 degree to the boat. They must be longer than 8.5'. Which means they hit the bottom in 9' of water, which we did anchor in.

 

The boat ends of our bridles were attached to padeyes under the deck edge, on the inboard side of the hull. Zero chance of chafing. These padeyes were very skookum, and were sized to also attach a parachute sea anchor bridle.

This is the connection. The ugly chunky seizing protects the lighter line inner seizing from chafing on the bottom. It was made with thin cheap nylon and was sacrificial.

image.png.a576c4238f35cc662eb7d0f2539d0a15.png

There is no deck 'edge' - at the bow its hemispherical and the blocks are such that the bridle arms (to the hook) do not touch the hull and then run aft along the deck, you can feed the lines through those leads that attach to the stanchions and are sold for feeding headsail furling lines.  The location is 'important' as you imply - it depends on your multi.  You don't need to use fixed blocks (ours are - we use pad eyes - you could still use blocks on soft shackles (or whatever)

You can make the 'triangle' any shape, or length, you like.  It light winds it can be as in your lower sketch and as the winds build you simply release more bridle (from the transom) to become more like your first sketch - and its what winds build you need to sketch like your first one (when yawing might become and issue).

The advantage is you have that deck length of elasticity (same climbing rope as yours) always in play.

Conventionally, on a multi, you have no control over total length, its fixed (and commonly too short and too beefy).  In the way I suggest you have a  length (which is longer than most multis would use) the you can vary to become longer but even with say 40' along the deck you can have very little 'forward' of the bow (so it does not touch the seabed).

How it is rigged depends on your deck - and your imagination.  The trick is using the length of the deck to allow you elasticity but keeping the bridle (or snubber) forward of the bow - short.

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

There are perhaps two ways to approach this - my thinking was:

(a) chain hooks clearly have a potential failure mode(s) (eg falling off the chain).  You can minimize the occurrence of that failure with technique and procedure (eg tending the snubber tension, not letting it sit on the bottom, always making sure there is sufficient chain loop on both sides of the hook, etc).  We did that for slightly shy of 20 years and yea it can be made to work.

(b) but why not have a system which entirely does away with that failure mode? The soft shackle accomplicates that. You can connect it on the foredeck and then don't need to pay it any further special attention.  Having used both systems, for me at least the soft shackle was a clear winner.

 

 

 

We tried soft shackles but we use 6mm chain.  Feeding a soft shackle through 6mm chain at 2am in the rain is not a bundle of laughs (even when the chain attachment point is in front of you on the foredeck).  A hook is 'easy' the links slips in with no need to look at it - (touchy feely :) ?  )

5/16th" chain, or 8mm is easier, but then you are carrying more weight and need more money to merit the larger cat that needs that size of chain :(

The other option is to use a strop attached to the apex of the bridle that you can use to tie a rolling hitch (a hook is quicker).

Most, or many multis do not have the necessity to attach the bridle forward and beyond the bow.  The windlass is 'aft' in the middle of the foredeck and the attachment point is, slightly, more convenient (ours is through a 'hole' in the trampoline.

There is no one right answer - its what you and the crew consider easiest, safest, convenient.  But the owner needs to think through the options and not be hide-bound by convention and historic usage - a bit of lateral thinking is valuable.  There are a number of hard devices to attach bridles/snubbers to chain,  claws, hooks, bridle plates, (and a variety of things that the lifting industry call 'clutches'.) and some soft options: soft shackles, rolling hitches.  In amongst all of these is one that will suit someone but not another.

 

The whole system has to be looked at as one matching unit, made up of individual 'components' that fit and are of the correct strength (not forgetting the anchor nor windlass)

 

Compromises, compromises.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Chain hooks, from chandlers, do have a problem - they stress the link in the jaw, or the links adjacent to the link in the jaw. unevenly.  This may weeken the links and more likely damage the galvanising.

Hooks from the lifting industry, soft shackles and rolling hitches remove this danger.

 

The question was raised - are there any reports of hard hooks actually causing chain failure - and as far as I know - none.  The comment was made that given the number of links in a rode the chances of using the same link frequently is low.

We would challenge this last idea.  When we deploy we calculate the scope we want to use and then calculate the length of rode needed.  We then use the mark on the chain closest to our rode length calculation almost invariable the next mark on the chain.  We thus use the chain mark as the location of the attachment of our snubber (bridle).  This thus means we use the same points, the same links, on the chain every time.

Why risk damaging the galvanising or reduce chain strength by using a device that might cause damage?

 

A rough survey of chain life seems to indicate that chain life is determined by the life of the galvanising.  You can re-birth chain by having it regalvanised but the gal determines normal life.  Based on people who live aboard in the Med an approximation on chain life is 1,200 days (or nights).  Most people in the Med don't actually sail far or much, they move day time from one gorgeous location to another (equally) gorgeous location and the 1,200 days (and nights) is not quite but effectively full time at anchor.

In other locations you might have slightly more or less life from the galvanising, some muds are anaerobic and 'dissolve' gal from the acidity of the seabed, some seabeds are very abrasive - but 1,200 days for gal life seems a good figure from which to start.

Anyone with a markedly different life - the data would be interesting.

Gal is  about 80-100 microns thick and to consider it last for 4 years is, to me, amazing.  People complain of gal life - I wonder if they are being fair and realistic?

Other than gal life then chain failure, the chain actually breaks, was commonly mentioned 10-15 years ago - now it is notable by its absence.  Chain strength, or lack of strength -seems a facet that has disappeared into the mists of time.

Chain life, or gal life, does not seem influenced by chain size nor strength (the G number).

But why impact the figures by using a hard attachment device that might damage, either the gal or the chain

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the rabbit might be getting a little pissed and wants everyone out of the hole..

But... To continue splitting hairs, one down side to the soft shackle would be the wierd fiber loading and chaffe on the up chain link.  This is assuming it goes in with the chain loaded.  Seems like using something small enough to clear the upper link would be on the small size.  They are cheep enough to be a consumable so probably not a big deal. Just wonder how they hold up for chaffe.  One more thing to think about when you are sitting out a blow.  It is interesting that this is one point I have never had anyone say it's failed under load regardless of how attached, hook soft shackle rolling hitches etc.

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

...... one down side to the soft shackle would be the wierd fiber loading and chaffe on the up chain link.  This is assuming it goes in with the chain loaded.  Seems like using something small enough to clear the upper link would be on the small size......

Other than taking an extra few seconds to rig, I don't see anything wrong with using an extra long soft shackle that passes thru 2 (or 3) links.  Thus doubling (or tripling) strength and (I assume) reducing chafe.

Edit:  Small size soft shackle is easier to "cut and run".

 

Link to post
Share on other sites