Photos of Anchors Setting

[Kenomac]

Here's a slightly different angle. When I originally set the anchor three days ago, I powered back in reverse at full throttle twice. 25 ton, full throttle reverse 100hp, 10:1 scope, 3.5 meter depth.

Other than a total solid rock bottom, this is about as bad as it gets. Once again, the Ultra saves me hundreds of euros. I'll probably try to re-anchor tomorrow, I know this anchorage very well.

Most who don't know this anchorage look down from their bow and assume large patches of sand, but get a little closer and this is what it is.

[noelex 77]

This was a CQR (genuine I think) in 8m @ 5:1. I am seeing very few CQR anchors these days out at the anchorages. They are still reasonably popular if you look at boats in the marinas. They are also much more popular in areas with softer sand. A lot of cruising boats in Australia still use a CQR, for example.

As I am posting a photograph of every anchor I or my mermaid have seen underwater, the number of images of each shows the relative popularity of anchor designs that are being used by people spending their time at anchor in this area.

Sadly this one was just dropped in weed with no force so it does not provide any information on how the anchor is performing.

[JPA Cate]

Noelex,

I notice a lot of rusty anchors in your pix. Is there a lack of re-galvanizing opportunities in the Med?

FWIW, it is still available in Oz, but not here in New Caledonia.

Ann

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

Noelex,

I notice a lot of rusty anchors in your pix. Is there a lack of re-galvanizing opportunities in the Med?

FWIW, it is still available in Oz, but not here in New Caledonia.

Ann

Ann,

The shiny and heavily galvanized anchors are on the bows of boats that stay in the marinas. He's showing pictures of well-used anchors which spend most of their time underwater and repeatedly getting scraped along the bottom.

Stainless solves the problem.

Ken

[Kenomac]

There was a 27ft sailboat left in the anchorage unattended for a week while the Couple went ashore to travel. It weathered several blasts of 30-35 knot winds, multiple wind changes without issue anchored just 100 meters off the shore. When they finally returned and pulled up the anchor.... it was a massive 22-25kg rusty old Bugel type, impressive for the size of boat.

They weren't fooling around.

[JPA Cate]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

There was a 27ft sailboat left in the anchorage unattended for a week while the Couple went ashore to travel. It weathered several blasts of 30-35 knot winds, multiple wind changes without issue anchored just 100 meters off the shore. When they finally returned and pulled up the anchor.... it was a massive 22-25kg rusty old Bugel type, impressive for the size of boat.

They weren't fooling around.

The inference is then, correct? that there is a shortage of galvanizing facilities in the Med????

Those Bugel's seem to be very good anchors.

Ann

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

Noelex,

I notice a lot of rusty anchors in your pix. Is there a lack of re-galvanizing opportunities in the Med?

FWIW, it is still available in Oz, but not here in New Caledonia.

Ann

As Ken has indicated, the anchors you are seeing here are much more likely to be on boats that anchor a lot rather than stay in a marinas. As such, the anchors are used more. Interestingly, the mix of anchor designs is also different, with far more new generation anchors than I see when wandering around marinas.

The other factor is that the hard sand is very abrasive. Soft sand, or mud seems much kinder. My New Zealand Rocna was re galvanised after only 3 years (we anchor almost 365 days a year so that is after a 1,000 nights at anchor).

I don't think there is any shortage of regalvanising facilities here.

[JPA Cate]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

As Ken has indicated, the anchors you are seeing here are much more likely to be on boats that anchor a lot rather than stay in a marinas. As such, the anchors are used more. Interestingly, the mix of anchor designs is also different, with far more new generation anchors than I see when wandering around marinas.

The other factor is that the hard sand is very abrasive. Soft sand, or mud seems much kinder. My New Zealand Rocna was re galvanised after only 3 years (we anchor almost 365 days a year so that is after a 1,000 nights at anchor).

I don't think there is any shortage of regalvanising facilities here.

Thank you. I understand, more abrasive bottoms tend to get anchors rusty.

Thanks to you and the mermaid for all the work.

Ann

[Rick01541]

Do you have any experience (and pictures) of concave anchors without roll bars (e.g., Spade)? Seems to me the roll bar would be a disadvantage at times (creates a resistance to penetrating deeper or simply adding weight up high).

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Rick01541

Do you have any experience (and pictures) of concave anchors without roll bars (e.g., Spade)? Seems to me the roll bar would be a disadvantage at times (creates a resistance to penetrating deeper or simply adding weight up high).

See post #1891. Ultra 45kg

[noelex 77]

This is a Brake anchor in stainless steel. 7m @ 5:1.

It is not a common anchor design, but a very interesting one for an Anchorholic.

It is the only anchor that is a mixture of a concave and convex blade. The anchor does not fit into any category. It is sort of a cross between the ballasted concave non rollbar anchor (like the Spade, Ultra, and Vulcan) and an ordinary convex plow anchor (like the Delta and many other designs).

In my opinion it is quite a good anchor and is a step up from the convex plow anchors, however, it is slightly erratic.

The shank was made thicker on later models and this seems to have reduced the performance. A heavier shank hurts most anchor designs, but particularly the concave non rollbar anchors. Hence the expensive fabricated shanks used on the Spade and Ultra and the complicated shank profile on the Vulcan.

The Brake has a ballasted tip so it has quite a bulky fluke profile, but the very end of the tip is fine. This sort of fine tip helps performance enabling an anchor to penetrate firmer substrates. However, making the tip finer does make it more vulnerable to bending when hitting rocks etc.

Personally, I have seen far more anchors with bent tips than bent shanks. Despite all the publicity, bent anchors (tips or shanks) are not common, but as far as I am aware the Brake does not come with a guarantee against deformation so have a look at the tip profile and make up your own mind.

As to performance, considering the substrate at this anchorage, the Brake is managing reasonably well. It has set in a relatively short distance (much quicker than most convex plow designs do even in good substrates) although there is a lot of the underside of the fluke exposed and much of the bury is due to heaping up of the substrate. Nevertheless, the tip has penetrated reasonably deeply and I think has managed to get through the very firm layer. If correct, this is important, as it suggests that with strong wind the anchor would keep diving rather than scraping along.

After the set, the anchor has rotated about 30°. It has a reasonable list, whether this is because of the rotation or because it set like this is not clear.

I will add a photo of the Brake out of the water in the next post so those not familiar with the design can see its unique shape.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Rick01541

Do you have any experience (and pictures) of concave anchors without roll bars (e.g., Spade)? Seems to me the roll bar would be a disadvantage at times (creates a resistance to penetrating deeper or simply adding weight up high).

There are numerous photos in this thread of ballasted concave non roll bar anchors such as the Spade, Ultra and Vulcan.

Have a look and make up your own mind.

I will try to briefly address some of the pros and cons of roll bars, as I see them, in my next post.

[noelex 77]

For those of you not familiar with the Brake, I dug this photo out of my collection.

The roll bar has been added by the owner .

This modification is bit silly. The roll bar does not have any magical properties. It merely allows an anchor to orient itself in the correct setting position without needing a bulky, heavy fluke.

Without the bulky ballast to keep the anchor upright, the thinner fluke of anchors with roll bars can penetrate the substrate better and the weight saved can be added to increase the fluke area, but as Rick points out, there are drawbacks to the roll bar as well.

To add a roll bar to an anchor with lots of balast in the fluke provides the drawback of both systems. The only possible reason for adding this would be if the owner noticed the ballast was not sufficient and the anchor was sitting upside down on occasion. I have never seen the Brake in this position, but I have not seen many underwater.

I also like to see how anchors balance on dry land and I have not managed to do this with the Brake. You can learn a lot about an anchor this way, especially when you understand how characteristics relate to the underwater performance of existing designs. How unstable is it in anything other than the setting position? How much tip weight does it have etc etc. I probably drive the chandleries nuts, although I invariably spend enough money that I don't feel guilty having a close, hands on, look at their anchors.

Anyway, here is a Brake complete with a homemade rollbar. Oh, and I think the colour scheme received a bit of extra flair as well :



Here is another one, boring colour and sans roll bar as it should be:

[noelex 77]

This was a Danforth, or more correctly a Danforth copy.

It was used as a stern anchor. It was subject to very little force, but this was still enough to keep the bow pointing into the swell.

It does not tell us anything about how the anchor will perform.

Notice how the plate on the crown (called the "Crown Plate" or "Tripping Palm") of the anchor helps keep the anchor from sinking into the substrate and presenting the flukes at a poor angle of attack. These are obviously more important in soft substrates where the Danforth works best. They are sometimes omitted, or are very small on some Danforth (or more correctly Danforth copy) anchors.

If you do set a second anchor like this, remember you will swing differently to other boats so make sure you have sufficient room.

[JPA Cate]

Ya know, noelex, you may not agree with me about this, but, when used as a stern anchor, to keep the bows into the wind, I don't think you need from the Danforth a deep and total set: all you want to do is keep the bows into the wind, in order to be more comfortable. Am I wrong here???? [By way of explanation here, we have used our Danforth, un-set, to keep us off a reef into which we might have swung. It seemed at the time that one did not require that much of it, just to keep one off the reef.]

Over to you.

Cheers,

Ann