Anchoring in extremis

<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   Next >  Last >> 
  • 17 Feb 2020 22:59
    Reply # 8752910 on 8752900

    Eric you are right in many ways,

    but remember, I am lucky enough to sail and anchor in non-tidal and and fairly protected waters. I don't strictly need that impressive holding power, but I need an anchor that will not fail badly on any sort of sea-bed, and one that will reset quickly after a wind change.

    Jack of all trades, ace of none  -  that is good enough for me.


    Cheers,
    Arne

    Arne

    It remembers me that when I bought my X95 Xyachts in Denmark the only anchor (and she was 40 years old) was a 8kg foldable grapnel. It has been OK for the no tide shalow,  muddy bottoms and protected anchorages of Denmark.

    Perhaps your anchor could be too technological !

    Cheers

    Eric

  • 17 Feb 2020 22:48
    Reply # 8752900 on 8752866
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Eric wrote,

    Bonsoir

    In a previous life, I tried to develop and sale anchors because we had access to Ukrainian titanium at stainlesssteel cost !

    We never succeed partly because my business partner was an aechitech an so an artist...

    It is much more difficult to develop an anchor than a junkrig sail....


    My comment on your anchor is that it is, I apologise,  an "old fashion" anchor. Modern performant anchors are not only setting properly but they dig themselve when overstressed. The resistance of an anchor is linked to the quantity of material (mud, sand...) that is between the anchor and the pull. For example a plug anchor as the delta will remain at the surface and drag slowly (at least it doesn't free) while a Rocna will dig itself more and more when over stressed.

    With your anchor the upper part will prevent the anchar to dig itself when over stressed.

    Eric

    Eric you are right in many ways,

    but remember, I am lucky enough to sail and anchor in non-tidal and and fairly protected waters. I don't strictly need that impressive holding power, but I need an anchor that will not fail badly on any sort of sea-bed, and one that will reset quickly after a wind change.

    Jack of all trades, ace of none  -  that is good enough for me.


    Cheers,
    Arne

    Last modified: 17 Feb 2020 22:50 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 17 Feb 2020 22:35
    Reply # 8752866 on 8752302
    Anonymous wrote:

    A Chinese-inspired stock-anchor

    This topic appears to come to life every (rare) now and then. Even I had a round on pondering about anchors, last summer.
    The idea was a Chinese-inspired stock anchor, which could be welded up from 8- or 10-millimetre steel. It was meant to be a jack of all trades anchor, which would bite instantly and have at least some holding power on most bottoms. The way it is designed, almost all its weight will rest on the tip of one of the flukes, and the stock will of course prevent it from dragging on its side. Some chain will be needed to ensure a horizontal pull.

    I only got as far as to produce three 1:1 models from plywood. The Mk4 model with 30° fluke angle appeared to be the most promising one, when testing in a sand pit. I would like to bring it to a nearby shop where a CNC-cutter could make use of my CAD drawings. If 8mm steel is used (and a 15mm rod for the stock), the Mk4 model should come out at around 8kg, which could fit my 2.2ton Ingeborg.
    Probably waste of money, but so what?

    Cheers,
    Arne


    click on photos to make them bigger...


    The Mk4 being glued up


    Testing, testing...


    the three models I made

    Bonsoir

    In a previous life, I tried to develop and sale anchors because we had access to Ukrainian titanium at stainlesssteel cost !

    We never succeed partly because my business partner was an architech an so an artist... he changed the design all the time.

    It is much more difficult to develop an anchor than a junkwing....


    My comment on your anchor is that it is, I apologise to be rude,  an "old fashion" anchor. Modern performant anchors are not only setting properly but they dig themselve when overstressed. The resistance of an anchor is linked to the quantity of material (mud, sand...) that is between the anchor and the pull. For example a plug anchor as the delta will remain at the surface and drag slowly (at least it doesn't free) while a Rocna will dig itself more and more when overstressed and so hold better and better (the issue will be to recover the anchor the next morning - the wild morring all always at night!).

    With your anchor, the upper part will prevent the anchor to dig itself when over stressed.

    Eric

    Last modified: 17 Feb 2020 22:49 | Anonymous member
  • 17 Feb 2020 22:19
    Reply # 8752829 on 459179
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    Take a look at Ingeborg’s foredeck. Just like so many Scandinavian boats, meant for almost non-tidal waters, she is not really prepared for being anchored from the bow; no bow roller and no anchor well (Johanna had it). Moreover, with the pulpit and rail removed, that foredeck feels a bit naked. The normal method around here is to drop the hook from the stern, 2-3 boatlengths from shore, and then jump ashore from the bow onto a (more or less) convenient rock, and tie up the boat. To do that, you either have to be very good at it and very agile, or you need a second crew to jump ashore for you.

    (.. guess why there is a unofficial sailor wifes’ association here, named " JUMP, GODDAMMIT!!! " ...) 

    I will go for something in between. Since I found that my plywood models will fit into the cockpit locker (once the stock has been removed), I find I will rather fit an anchor roller at the stern  -  at the port ‘corner’. Then I can anchor backwards, in my protected and non-tidal waters. Doing the anchor work from the safety of the cockpit suits me better, even if I cannot ‘sail up’ the anchor that elegantly as Annie does it.

    This is anyway armchair talk. I will report back when the method has been practiced.

    Cheers,
    Arne


    Last modified: 17 Feb 2020 22:23 | Anonymous member (Administrator)
  • 17 Feb 2020 19:46
    Reply # 8752495 on 8752302
    Arne wrote:

    A Chinese-inspired stock-anchor

    This topic appears to come to life every (rare) now and then. Even I had a round on pondering about anchors, last summer.
    The idea was a Chinese-inspired stock anchor, which could be welded up from 8- or 10-millimetre steel. It was meant to be a jack of all trades anchor, which would bite instantly and have at least some holding power on most bottoms. The way it is designed, almost all its weight will rest on the tip of one of the flukes, and the stock will of course prevent it from dragging on its side. Some chain will be needed to ensure a horizontal pull.

    I only got as far as to produce three 1:1 models from plywood. The Mk4 model with 30° fluke angle appeared to be the most promising one, when testing in a sand pit. I would like to bring it to a nearby shop where a CNC-cutter could make use of my CAD drawings. If 8mm steel is used (and a 15mm rod for the stock), the Mk4 model should come out at around 8kg, which could fit my 2.2ton Ingeborg.
    Probably waste of money, but so what?
    The Mk4 being glued up


    the three models I made

    Arne, I love the way your brain works!

    I have actually seen something not dissimilar in the flesh (so to speak), in the second-hand boat-gear shop, which used to be in Whangarei.  It would probably work OK, although, like a Danforth, might be inclined to trip itself when the tide changes.  I did think it would be a bit of a beast to stow!

  • 17 Feb 2020 19:35
    Reply # 8752467 on 8751469
    David wrote:Anchors and boats are odd: occasionally boat A drags all over the place with one anchor and then happily stays put with another.  The owner will swear at the first one and sear by the second one.  On the other hand, boat B will be a headache when anchored on the second anchor but always behave herself on the first. 

    It's the bottom that makes the difference, not the boat. A Bruce will pick up a boulder and hug it, preventing it from digging in. A "plough" will scrape along the surface of a hard sand bottom, when a "scoop" will dig in. A Rocna has been known to get a big clod of sticky mud on it, which prevents digging in after a 180˚ turn of tide. And so it goes on. No anchor is perfect in all bottoms, but the modern scoops have generally got themselves a better reputation than their forerunners.


    It seems more complicated than that.  Zebedee has dragged his Rocna on far too many occasions and Alan is tempted to go back to his Bruce, which never let him down.  The Carrs anchored Curlew exclusively on CQRs, even in South Georgia - Badger would have been on the rocks in seconds relying on one of those.  Iron Bark would drag her Manson plough and wasn't at all happy on a Delta, which we dragged spectacularly through a muddy bottom, while Asmat's Wylo II finds it satisfactory.  Some boats, from my experience, just don't suit some anchors and Zebedee has made me realise that even the lastest anchors aren't always necessarily the best.  (However, I do think that your comment about the Rocna is why Zebedee has problems: for a variety of reason, Alan tends to anchor while the boat is still going forward.  But again, it's a peculiarity of the boat - or at least the way it is sailed - that affects the choice of anchor.)

    I would, however, completely agree that with a new boat, the first anchor I'd buy would be one of the latest designs, but I do like to have more than one type, as you suggest. 

    I'm still looking for a 25lb Luke or equivalent, in case I end up anchoring among rocks or kelp.  This is more to feed my fantasies than a genuine need!


    Last modified: 17 Feb 2020 19:40 | Anonymous member
  • 17 Feb 2020 17:58
    Reply # 8752302 on 459179
    Anonymous member (Administrator)

    A Chinese-inspired stock-anchor

    This topic appears to come to life every (rare) now and then. Even I had a round on pondering about anchors, last summer.
    The idea was a Chinese-inspired stock anchor, which could be welded up from 8- or 10-millimetre steel. It was meant to be a jack of all trades anchor, which would bite instantly and have at least some holding power on most bottoms. The way it is designed, almost all its weight will rest on the tip of one of the flukes, and the stock will of course prevent it from dragging on its side. Some chain will be needed to ensure a horizontal pull.

    I only got as far as to produce three 1:1 models from plywood. The Mk4 model with 30° fluke angle appeared to be the most promising one, when testing in a sand pit. I would like to bring it to a nearby shop where a CNC-cutter could make use of my CAD drawings. If 8mm steel is used (and a 15mm rod for the stock), the Mk4 model should come out at around 8kg, which could fit my 2.2ton Ingeborg.
    Probably waste of money, but so what?

    Cheers,
    Arne


    click on photos to make them bigger...


    The Mk4 being glued up


    Testing, testing...


    the three models I made

  • 17 Feb 2020 08:46
    Reply # 8751469 on 459179

    Annie wrote:

    Chris wrote:

    Serious cruisers think that the new generation anchors are a quantum leap ahead of the CQR, Delta and Bruce.

    David, that's terrible news for my financial planning!

    But good to know. Thank you.

    Anchors and boats are odd: occasionally boat A drags all over the place with one anchor and then happily stays put with another.  The owner will swear at the first one and sear by the second one.  On the other hand, boat B will be a headache when anchored on the second anchor but always behave herself on the first. 

    It's the bottom that makes the difference, not the boat. A Bruce will pick up a boulder and hug it, preventing it from digging in. A "plough" will scrape along the surface of a hard sand bottom, when a "scoop" will dig in. A Rocna has been known to get a big clod of sticky mud on it, which prevents digging in after a 180˚ turn of tide. And so it goes on. No anchor is perfect in all bottoms, but the modern scoops have generally got themselves a better reputation than their forerunners.

    My own choice is a 10kg Manson Supreme, but to be honest, I still have a very soft spot for a Bruce and I am perfectly happy with my 10 kg Delta (knock-off) for a second anchor, for the 26ft boat I'm building.  I have a wee Bruce for a kedge.  Admittedly, some kind soul gave me the Delta, which he had carried, unused, on his boat for 20 years!  One of the really great things about a smaller boat, is that you can 'over-anchor' the boat and still have easily-handled ground tackle. 

    So three anchors, all different, two of which might be considered oversize, on a 26ft boat. This is one point that separates serious cruisers from "the rest" - when their insurance policy is their ground tackle, they have several anchors of different types, heavier than the manufacturer's recommendation.

    On Fanshi, I intend to have 8mm chain with my 10kg Manson:  I saw a 45 footer the other day with the same kit!!  Admittedly, that is ludicrous, but there are heaps of boats 10 ft longer than mine where the only difference between their ground tackle and mine is an extra 5 kg on the anchor!

    Modern thinking is to use stronger, lighter chain (GR 80) in place of heavier, weaker chain (GR 30 or BBB), but this will mean more roaming about at anchor. When they do use GR 80, they can either carry a greater length of it, or put the weight saved into the anchor, which makes sense - the heavier the anchor, the better it will punch through weed and find the bottom.

    Anchors may seem expensive, but you will wish you'd invested a bit more money when you are dragging down onto the rocks.  They are not something I would economise on.

    Agreed.

    Last modified: 17 Feb 2020 09:04 | Anonymous member
  • 15 Sep 2017 23:12
    Reply # 5262963 on 459179

    You might enjoy this video of anchoring in a hurricane (albeit in shelter) using a Mantus anchor. https://youtu.be/52vu7bbvqC0

    I have one but I've yet to have the pleasure of using it in heavy weather.

  • 13 Sep 2017 21:56
    Reply # 5151118 on 5148390
    David Tyler wrote:

    The Vulcan was actually designed for the benefit of the stinkpots. It will self launch and self recover on a bow roller better than other types.

    Hmph. You try getting the Vulcan out of sticky mud after a blow, Peter. Not so easy, then.

    Ah yes - the self launcher.  Absolutely essential, don't you know?

    What you need, dear man, is a chain pawl.  Then you can ease it out of the mud link by link.  Nice to know it's hard to break out.  I shall add it to my list of 'good anchors'.


<< First  < Prev   1   2   3   4   Next >  Last >> 
       " ...there is nothing - absolutely nothing - half so much worth doing as simply messing about in junk-rigged boats" 
                                                               - the Chinese Water Rat

                                                              Site contents © the Junk Rig Association and/or individual authors

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software