Photos of Anchors Setting

[CookiesnTequila]

Originally Posted by Seaworthy Lass

Our initial contact was via: info@maggigroup.com
SWL

Thank you

Originally Posted by Palarran

As an FYI, if you go to maggigroup.com you can price and buy the chain on line. It is 1215 euro for 100 meters of 10mm G7. This is just slightly more than standard G30. Really nice website. The difference in weight for 100 meters of G7 10mm to G4 13mm, which I have is 1600kg. That's a huge difference for me.

Their weight is wrong! 1 meter cannot be 230kg! They have added a 0 by mistake! I hope at least!!!

[CookiesnTequila]

Originally Posted by nigel1

Was that Bradney chain in the UK (Dudley, West Midlands).
I bought some good chain from them about 3 years ago. Went to buy another 60m last year, and appears they have been taken over by William Hackett Chains Ltd.
I bought G4 chain from William Hackett, and the quality appears as good as the Bradney chain.

I will try them also...
Thanks

[noelex 77]

I think the Maggi table even though it says "weight", is actually referring to strength.

The weight of chain varies with which table you believe. The most common figure for 12mm chain is 3.8 kg/m and the most common figure for 10mm is 2.3 kg/m (although DIN and ISO 10mm are slightly different).

The total weight of 100m (330 feet) of 12 mm is 380 kg and in 10 mm it is 230 kg.
So for 100m the weight savings switching from 12mm G3 or G4 to 10mm G7 is about 150 kg (330 lb). Both these chains will have a similar strength.

People worry about small increases in bow weight from increasing the anchor size by one or two steps, but the difference is small compared to the weight of the chain.

[CookiesnTequila]

One more question (for now! )


For those that spend most of their time on the hook, and carry 100 meters of chain:

1) How often do you wish you had more than 100 meters?
2) How much would you have if weight/space/$$ were not an issue?

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by CookiesnTequila

One more question (for now! )


For those that spend most of their time on the hook, and carry 100 meters of chain:

1) How often do you wish you had more than 100 meters?
2) How much would you have if weight/space/$$ were not an issue?

Well, we have lived on the hook for 28+ years now. Our previous boat had 80 metres of chain backed with a lot of nylon. In the 17 years we cruised on her, we got into the nylon part one time. Our current boat has, guess what? 80 metres of chain and no nylon. We've only had her for 13 years, and have never needed a greater length. Our cruising has lead us from SF to Mexico and French Polynesia (twice) and on into the western South Pacific for the past 23 years. We've anchored in water as deep as 85 feet a couple of times and 60+ quite a few times.

I haven't ever really wished I had more chain, and am quite satisfied with what we do have. If I felt we needed more, I'd surely have it.

jim

[CookiesnTequila]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Well, we have lived on the hook for 28+ years now.
I haven't ever really wished I had more chain, and am quite satisfied with what we do have. If I felt we needed more, I'd surely have it.

jim

Great feedback, thx!

[NornaBiron]

Originally Posted by nigel1

Was that Bradney chain in the UK (Dudley, West Midlands).
I bought some good chain from them about 3 years ago. Went to buy another 60m last year, and appears they have been taken over by William Hackett Chains Ltd.
I bought G4 chain from William Hackett, and the quality appears as good as the Bradney chain.

It was - but it was bought in about 1990 by the original owner!

[NornaBiron]

Originally Posted by CookiesnTequila

One more question (for now! )


For those that spend most of their time on the hook, and carry 100 meters of chain:

1) How often do you wish you had more than 100 meters?
2) How much would you have if weight/space/$$ were not an issue?

We went up from 83m to 100m when we renewed our chain last year. We rarely put more than 50m out and this allows us to end for end the chain as the galvanising wears.

Since we bought new chain we have anchored in Greece, Turkey and Egyptian Red Sea waters, 100m has been ample (83 would have been too).

[kas_1611]

We don't live on the hook all the time but do anchor out quite a lot. Originally had 50m of chain but when we upgraded to the G70 with the new anchor we could get 40m or 60m. Not wanting to go down we stepped up to 60m, which actually means we can anchor in up to 13m of water (15m from bowroller) if we need to.

Up to now we have never had to let out all the chain but it is there if we need to increase the scope or drop in deeper water. Additionally we have 45m of 16mm anchorplait so if it is likely to be really nasty weather we can scope out further or even lay back to tie up to shore when we hadn't originally planned to. The 16mm is for rare occasions or safety rather than for general use.

Not sure 100m of 8mm would actually have fit in our chain locker but I do know the car would have grumbled trying to carry the extra 40m of chain across Europe. Had to increase the tyre pressures as it was and the rear tyres were almost rubbing on the wheel arches!!

Keiron

[mikereed100]

Originally Posted by CookiesnTequila

One more question (for now! )


For those that spend most of their time on the hook, and carry 100 meters of chain:

1) How often do you wish you had more than 100 meters?
2) How much would you have if weight/space/$$ were not an issue?

We carry 100m and found that we used it all fairly often in the Philippines, Alaska and PNW. In the Channel Islands of Southern California we rarely use more than 70m. We tend to put out more scope than most people, at least 5:1 and will go to 7:1 if it looks like wind. We have friends that circumnavigated with 70m on a slightly larger cat, but they laughed when they learned that we used more than 3:1 scope.

[CookiesnTequila]

Originally Posted by mikereed100

We carry 100m and found that we used it all fairly often in the Philippines, Alaska and PNW. In the Channel Islands of Southern California we rarely use more than 70m. We tend to put out more scope than most people, at least 5:1 and will go to 7:1 if it looks like wind. We have friends that circumnavigated with 70m on a slightly larger cat, but they laughed when they learned that we used more than 3:1 scope.

Thx - This is much more like my thoughts! Maybe I'm just be showing my age (not having owned a boat for 20 years!), but I have always worked on the 5:1 in settled weather, 7:1 in bad, rule. But seems most people are getting away with much less these days - maybe quality of anchors!?!? I always use 7:1 when space permits regardless of weather, and certainly wouldn't think of less if the wind is going to pipe up.

[0urh]

[QUOTE=NornaBiron;1958647]We went up from 83m to 100m when we renewed our chain last year. We rarely put more than 50m out and this allows us to end for end the chain as the galvanising wears.

Curious as to how you get 100m of chain onto the boat? Very strong back?

[noelex 77]

This was a Danforth, or more correctly a Danforth copy. It was being used as a temporary mooring rather than as a normal anchor. It was only minimally set. It is difficult to be sure how much force has been applied. There was a faint mark extending some distance, which I think was a long setting mark that had gradually filled in, but it was difficult to photograph.

You can see how the flat plate at the crown (the mud palms on a Fortress anchor are similar) keeps the crown from sinking below the substrate. This feature is needed for softer substrates, but it does little harm in harder substrates.

[hoppy]

Do you guys think that scope can affect the setting of an anchor? Whilst it's probably correct to say the more scope used will improve the holding of a set anchor, but I suspect that some anchor designs might be a bit scope sensitive when it comes to setting.

For example (this is just my guessing), if a Delta lands on it's side and you let out too much scope, when reversing back the weight of the chain might mean that the end of the shank drags along the bottom and then it stays on its side and it never sets. But if a shorter scope is used (say 3:1) then reversing might tension the chain enough to lift the shank helping it right itself and set. Once set the extra scope could be let out.

Anyone think this could be plausible?

[Robin3]

Originally Posted by hoppy

Do you guys think that scope can affect the setting of an anchor? Whilst it's probably correct to say the more scope used will improve the holding of a set anchor, but I suspect that some anchor designs might be a bit scope sensitive when it comes to setting.

For example (this is just my guessing), if a Delta lands on it's side and you let out too much scope, when reversing back the weight of the chain might mean that the end of the shank drags along the bottom and then it stays on its side and it never sets. But if a shorter scope is used (say 3:1) then reversing might tension the chain enough to lift the shank helping it right itself and set. Once set the extra scope could be let out.

Anyone think this could be plausible?

It has always been my practice to use 3:1 as the initial scope with our Deltas and indeed CQRs and copies of same beforehand. Admittedly I use 3 x current actual depth plus the bow roller height above water as the start point then adjust for predicted HW depth on final adjustment once set and the scope increased if I feel it necessary for predicted conditions. I have always had no difficulty getting the anchor to set with a controlled pull to dig it in once it has begun. I Will admit I have no personal experience in the bottoms of the eastern Med but my tactics served me well for years in areas with mud and hard sand bottoms and I have not changed them since moving from Europe to the USA, nor do I intend to. Read into that what you will but others may have additional information, practical or theoretical. My Mermaid is on perpetual dive and mast climb strike these days, claimimg senior citizenship, so no pretty pics to post.