Only One Anchor

[MidLandOne]

I think anchor weight selection is much the same as with selecting autopilot drives, the manufacturers give a guide only but then one has to work from that to suit ones own circumstances with respect to the boat, its characteristics, and cruising location or if to be independantly free ranging.

With respect to weight I don't think that going up some anchor sizes is either here nor there as far as a weight penalty to a cruising boat's performance is concerned, especially for bigger boats were anchor weight is a much smaller proportion of total boat mass than it is for very small ones. Obviously for light high performance vessels and the likes of other weight sensitive ones such as cats then also maybe of more concern.

In our own case we have had Manson Ploughs for many years and for which the anchor builder's recommendation, purely on boat length in his tables, is 45lb. We use the 60lb version (two sizes up) which is a weight penalty on the boat of only 15lb. If one considers that weight penalty against that imposed by other things many of us happily carry just for entertainment, etc it seems unimportant.

Interestingly if we went to Manson's Supreme, selection off their tables would again result in a 45lb anchor. And if we went two sizes up on that as we did with the ploughs quite some years ago, we would end up with a 60lb Supreme - so if just work on that basis we would get no weight saving, but probably better holding (like 125% reliability rather than just the 100% we have had so far ).

[Seeratlas]

Originally Posted by High Cotton

HIGH COTTON had two (2) 45lb CQR's on a double roller..... and the previous owner (old guy, of course, I'm 60, so I mean OLD!) had the boat in the Carribean all the way to VENEZUELA for the last 5 years......
He's gone to "the BIG pond in the sky" so I couldn't ask him how they did.

HC, I think you'll be fine, but I like the two anchors ready to go scenario. I'm seriously thinking about one of these Bruce copies I just posted about as a secondary for times where you want to short scope it, or anchor bow and stern to stay put, might not be a bad deal. I ran both a big bruce and a CQR on my previous boat and between the two of em I always found a way to get the boat to stick where I wanted. Where the plow wouldn't work well, the bruce did dandy and *usually* vice versa. I ran a full chain rode.

seer

[Seeratlas]

Originally Posted by MidLandOne

(like 125% reliability rather than just the 100% we have had so far ).

LOL

seer

[GMac]

Originally Posted by Steve Pope

Grant was that a 15lb supreme or 15kg supreme you were using??

15lb. I always seem to use pounds when talking Manson and kgs on everything else. No idea way, probably blame Manson for still using that funny old imperial system No way 15kg, my entire anchoring system is usually only 21 kg all up (55mts of rope/ 15mts of chain and the anchor).

Just back from a bloody hot but enjoyable weekend. Take 2 12 year olds out and add 10knts to the breeze and we would have been close to perfect. Chuck in a hot 25 year old and perfection............errr.. divorce probably (Crap did I say 25, what happened to 18? )

Oversizeing the new ones??? Don't have too like you used to do. If you are thinking of jumping up a few sizes I'd make bloody sure you know the physical dimensions before you do. The S R S (Supreme Rocna Spade) are a lot physically bigger than the older in most case.

Someone above mentioned going up from a 45 to a 60lb Supreme, that is a big size jump. A 60lb Supreme is nearly twice the size of a 60lb plow. Check it'll fit.

[Topazken]

Never Ever go offshore with just one anchor.

All of your anchors need to be at least one or two sizes larger than MFGR suggestion.

Most boats that drag do so because they fail to lay enough CHAIN on the bottom. 5:1 scope minimum, i.e. 30' of water, 150' of chain. For a 35' boat or larger, minimum 3/8" chain.

Primary anchor Must be a plow type, CQR, Delta etc. Following the above rules, all will work very well.

I would NEVER use a Bruce as a primary. It WILL pick up debris and become useless. It is a great stern hook, however, as it sets very fast.

I love the Fortress but if there is even a chance of rock, coral or weed, leave it aboard.

Ken Hellewell - Solo Circumnavigator, and Author of , Ken's Comprehensive Cruising Guide for the Kingdom of Tonga, Ken's Torres Strait Passage Guide & Ken's Cruising Yacht.

www.kenhellewell.com

[Steve Pope]

Topazken, Can't come to grips with the "must be" plow type unless you are unaware of the advances made by the "new" generation of anchors, My CQR type anchors are around 80% reliable often having to be relaid more than twice before getting a satisfactory grip on the bottom. My Rocna so far has held on the first drop every time and in a very quick manner. Still testing but so far it is the goods. Old CQR type will stay on board as back up for a while, but I am guessing they will become redundant sooner rather than later.

[GMac]

G'day Ken. Nice to see a new player in the 'which is best' anchoring game, the game in which no-one wins

Yeap I'm in with Steve a bit. You're right but seem to have excluded the newer designs. I'm also not to sure why a Bruce is so evil on the bow but not the stern as well.

Balls on the line here - I'd say most anchors drag because of the user. Just like guns don't kill people, the person using it does. As rule one of any boating is 'the owner/ chief user is the person who makes all the calls be it weather, location or what anchor they are happy to use. Obviously there will always be the 's**t happens events' but when you pull most anchor issues down they would have been easily got around if the user took the time/ had the brains/ cared/ actually knew/ asked someone who did know and etc.

When I do a boat check the anchor system is always on my list. I'm constantly surprised by the number who don't. The answer to "So what anchor have you got now?" is very often "Err... it's grey steel". Often we'll also get "a plough" only to find out it's not. Strangely most of these people can quote off the top of their head all the features of their flat screen TV and/or cellphone. Interesting priorities don't you think?

So the anchor is working well so far Steve but have you caught any fish?? Don't ask me the same question, I will get rude due to frustration

[seafox]

THE FINAL WORD...

yeah....right

[Steve Pope]

GMac The easy answer is yes and yes, although the snappers were all to short so after giving them the kiss of life they all went back to grow a little larger, has a nice meal of maumau at Whangaruru though.

[Alan Wheeler]

15" wide screen LCD Phi......Oh anchors! Right!
Ken, the normal rule of thumb for anchoring with all chain is 3x depth. With Rope it is 5x depth. Sure 5x with all chain is good, but then so is 7x or 10x, if you have enough on board. I have no issues with 3x with all chain, 10mm on a 45ft boat.

[cagney]

The CQR anchor has one big problem, that appear after extensive use.
For the correct performance of the anchor it is important that the angle between the plow and the shank is kept within fin tolerances. I have experienced old, worn CQR:s , where the hole (gudgeon)
has grown and the pin(pintle) has worn thinner. These worn anchors has refused to set in perfect sand bottom. I first came across this working for one of the bare boat companies in St Vincent and the Grenadines. Asking around among other bare boat companies further north, this fact seemed to be common knowledge and one reason for a slow migration to Delta.
This was in mid/late nineties before the Rocna etc.

[Topazken]

Sorry Wheeler...

Using 3:1 will cost you your boat. It is just not enough. If you are anchored in firm sand and a semi-protected harbor with a large Fortress anchor, 3:1 is OK. When you are anchoring in the coral strewn and semi-open waters of the Pacific, Atlantic or Indian Ocean, every night for years, 3:1 just won't cut it. Besides, who cares what the "standard" is. Anchor well away from others and lay down lots of chain. The chain doesn't care and it will help you sleep easy every night.

I know that in crowded harbors too much scope is rude. If you are crowded into close proximity, you will have to shorten the scope and resort to the occasional anchor watches.

In my original post I called for a plow type anchor as the primary. By the time a cruiser gets to the South Pacific they have learned that there is no telling what the bottom will really be like. The whole idea of surveying the bottom and picking the best kind for the conditions is just too bothersome. The areas of clear sand and mud are rare so the Fortress gets put away. Even if you end up in a protected sand and mud bottomed harbor like Suva, there is so much trash on the bottom that the anchor least likely to foul is the best.

Again, plow type anchor and lots of scope. It really is the only universal solution.

Oh... Plow type means just about anything like the CQR, Delta, Spade etc.

[GordMay]

Good point.
Worn oval holes, and loose pins (pintles/gudgeons, clevis shackles, turnbuckles, etc) leads to "point loading" which greatly reduces the already reduced strength (it's worn 'smaller") of the fitting. This is always a serious deficiency.

[MidLandOne]

Originally Posted by cagney

I have experienced old, worn CQR:s , where the hole (gudgeon) has grown and the pin(pintle) has worn thinner.

The Manson Plough Anchors are sensibly built the other way around in that the shank rotates on the pin, the pin being welded into the plough. So the bearing surfaces are far greater.

Originally Posted by Topazken

Sorry Wheeler...

Using 3:1 will cost you your boat. It is just not enough...

...Again, plow type anchor and lots of scope. It really is the only universal solution.

We also find that 3:1 serves us well and has never been a problem. But we have oversized gear and also generally anchor in deep water so that scope gives sufficient catenary.

We have sat out sustained 70+ knots with around 4 miles fetch for around 24 hours on 3:1 scope (despite the fact that we can put out well over 600 foot of cable) and not moved. On a different bottom or stronger winds it may have been different but in the case I knew that if we dragged it would be into shallower water so the scope would manage itself by increasing and a longer scope would have us on the rocks if the wind changed direction.

So to make the claim that 3:1 scope will lose your boat is incorrect and is a wild generalisation. I think most of us make a judgement of the conditions of the time, the holding, the depth, the type of gear on the boat and the other dangers around us, and use what is appropriate. That may turn out to be less rather than more, but in our case anchoring on a range of bottoms and in quite rugged areas 3:1 has generally been fine except in very shallow water (I assume none of us would expect to often overnight on 18 foot of cable in 6 foot of water/freeboard ).

[Topazken]

My claim that 3:1 will cost you your boat is not a wild exageration. I really cannot count the number of times I have had to help rescue dragging boats.

In La Paz Mexico where it is especially bad, it is no exageration to say that I helped at least three people each and every week. Sometimes it was three a day.

Just because you have had luck with 3:1 does not mean it will work for everyone in all conditions. The best way to insure security is with oversized gear and scope.

There is no caternary effect at 3:1 and 70 knot winds. It has been well proven that depending on windage, at 50 knots plus the chain will become taut with a 3:1 scope.

What is the first thing you do when a storm hits? Yep, let out some more chain. Wht not let it out to start with and sleep easy.

Why would you advocate less chain instead of more? It is like telling people that a smaller anchor is OK because it works for you.