Photos of Anchors Setting

[noelex 77]

This is another one from last year.

It is a steel Spade. It was dropped by a cat that then stern tied back to the rocks. 6m @ 7:1.

The Spade has done a great job. It has set nicely with only a small portion of the top of the shank and the back of the fluke visible. My only slight criticism is the setting distance is bit longer than is usual for the Spade. The Spade is an anchor that normally sets rapidly.

Notice anything unusual ?

[noelex 77]

This closer photo might help :

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

This closer photo might help :

Still hard to see but is that a bucket the anchor is dragging? Or remnant of a Roman galley?

[noelex 77]

Spot on Don. It's an ancient bucket of sorts

[noelex 77]

The Spade has hit, and partially dug up an amphora. If you remember our own Mantus anchor did the same thing (see post #1122). I guess if you want an anchor to dig up ancient artefacts Mantus and Spade are the best . I also wonder if hitting the amphora adversely effected the Spade's setting distance?

This shows the broken part of the amphora better. Amazing to think it probably rested under the sand unseen for the last 2000+ years.

[noelex 77]

An ideal setting mark gets rapidly and importantly progressively deeper. The Spade has ended up beautifully set, but the marks on the sand show the anchor went deeper then shallower and then deeper as it finally set fully. The deeper initial mark towards the top of the photo indicates the anchor had a significant list for several feet in the early part of the set. This behaviour is unusual for this design. I watched the drop and there was no problem with the technique.

It is easier to see this first hand, with the benefit of stereopsis, rather than looking at photos, so here I have roughly coloured the shallow parts of the setting mark red and the deeper bits green. The anchor did a hop, although it did not break out completely. I think the anchor caught the amphora early in the setting process and this restricted its ability to dive, as you would expect. Just before the end it shed the debris and rapidly set normally. I think the amphora was the cause of the atypically long setting distance.







An enlargement of the final "hop" might help. You can see the amphora is resting just at the spot where the setting marks gets shallow. After this the Spade sets rapidly deeper.:







There is a lot of information in the setting marks. If you dive to take a look at your anchor, study the marks in the sand carefully. They tell a story. If you look with a critical eye it is a bit like recreating a crime scene from the blood splatter. Perhaps I have consumed too much cold brewed coffee .

[double u]

outstanding job you're doing, outstanding! pics & analysis!!!

[Hydra]

I'm amazed by the clarity of the water. In the areas where I cruise, it's often not possible to see the bottom.

Alain

[Don C L]

I'd guess the anchor snagged the amphora then dragged it till it broke and then was free to dive. Around here we snag lumps of kelp. Amphorae are a far more interesting reasons to drag!

[noelex 77]

Back to the present day.

We have been at this anchorage a few days. The deep initial bury indicated quite a soft substrate. This is a reminder of the original set:



We had a 180° wind shift and the wind picked up to around 27 knots. This sort of wind, while hardly taxing for a good anchor, is enough to cause the anchor to rotate. It is also about equivalent to setting force, so with bit of luck and a few stronger gusts the anchor can set a bit deeper.

Most of our photos have been in hard substrates so my mermaid and I worked hard to get some photos in this softer bottom. Unfortunately, the visibility in soft substrates is often not very good and with the slightly stronger wind it deteriorated badly. Yesterday we could not find the anchor at all despite a lot of searching. Today we used a slightly different technique with one of us at the bow with a laser rangefinder and hand bearing compass and the other in the water diving down to the bottom, hopefully in the right spot.

So here are the pictures. You can see the Mantus has rotated 180° without moving backwards and has dug in even deeper so only the top quarter of the rollbar is now visible. As a consequence of the soft substrate, it is a very deep bury for the wind strength.














I am not sure it was worth all this trouble to take these photos. Soft substrates make it very easy for the anchor to set well. The clever design and geometry that is used on the best anchors to achieve a high force to drive the fluke down, is essential for hard substrates and weed, but is a bit superfluous for these softer bottoms. Most anchors can set very well in this sort of substrate.

[jmtindle3]

In defense of the Delta ,that I thing is getting a bum rap I add this thought. In my experience in the Caribbean and the Bahamas most charter companies use Delta anchors as the primary and Brittney anchors as backup. I do not believe this is because of cost as I am sure the last thing they want is to lose or badly damage a charter boat. I know there are better anchors out there but from my experience Deltas are one of the best. When I bought my first charter boat in 2002 they supplied their boats with Brittney anchors. When I brought the boat back to the states I stopped in the Bahamas and dropped my Brittney. I had a reef behind me and in the night a wind storm developed I spent a sleepless night wildly swinging on This strange to me Brittney. The next morning we were right where we had anchored. I think better of the cheap anchors after that. One more think, I have never used an over sized Delta on any of my boats. What ever was on the size chart is what I used.

[Mantus 1]

Hello jmtindle3, First I want to say that any anchor that is set properly is good! And you say that most charter boats have Delta's. I believe that is true because the builder gets a package deal on there Lewmar products and the anchor is part of it.
And as far as the charter company caring about the boats. They do not insure the boats. At least in the case of Sun Sail the owner is the one insuring the boat. And the one dealing with the insurance when it gets damaged in a storm or grounded. And i believe that the person chartering the boat is responsible for damages done when they have the boat. (If they get caught) I have seen this all happen with our friends Cat that just came out of charter.
I believe some owners never take possession of the boats when the 5 year term is up they just let the charter company sell the boat.
Our friend brought his boat back to FL from the Bahamas after having some repairs done to the keel after it had been on a reef. That the charter company did not know had happened before he had it hauled for his survey.
With this said if I had a boat in charter I would be upgrading the anchor to a New Generation style for my piece of mind!

[motion30]

[Q
UOTE=jmtindle3;2151647]In defense of the Delta ,that I thing is getting a bum rap I add this thought. In my experience in the Caribbean and the Bahamas most charter companies use Delta anchors as the primary and Brittney anchors as backup. I do not believe this is because of cost as I am sure the last thing they want is to lose or badly damage a charter boat. I know there are better anchors out there but from my experience Deltas are one of the best. When I bought my first charter boat in 2002 they supplied their boats with Brittney anchors. When I brought the boat back to the states I stopped in the Bahamas and dropped my Brittney. I had a reef behind me and in the night a wind storm developed I spent a sleepless night wildly swinging on This strange to me Brittney. The next morning we were right where we had anchored. I think better of the cheap anchors after that. One more think, I have never used an over sized Delta on any of my boats. What ever was on the size chart is what I used.[/QUOTE]

I agree that the delta is the best of the old style anchors, but it does not compare at all to any of the new generation anchors. I have al Masons Supreme and currently own a mantus and I would not trade either of those anchors for a truckload of Delta's. perhaps you have never used a new-generation anchor if you do you will understand

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by jmtindle3

In defense of the Delta ,that I thing is getting a bum rap

Thanks Jmtindle. User reports are always valuable.

It is also surprising to me that charter companies don't universally upgrade the design of their anchors. There are an increasing number of Greek charter boats with new generation anchors, usually Rocnas. Surprisingly (given the cost) I also see a few Turkish charter boats with Ultra anchors, but as you say, there are still a lot of both private and charter boats with Deltas.

As for the Delta getting a "bum rap", untilł recently, my mermaid and I have simply photographed and posted at least one image of every anchor we have seen. What we see is what you see. If you think the photos of the Delta show poor performance then you must understand I don't have any control over the results of other people's anchors. The photos show how the Delta has performed underwater under real anchoring situations.

On the other hand, If you think my commentary on the photos of the Delta anchors is unduly harsh, then I applaud you for looking at the images and making up your own mind. My greatest hope in showing these pictures is that people will do just that.

[malbert73]

Yeah- after watching a delta slowly, inch by inch drag through loose sand/dead coral on each swing on my last 2 charters- I'd say sure the set quickly and surely but without a ton of holding power in looser substrates. No reason in BVI not to spend an extra 100 for a rocna. I spent an extra 100 on moorings so I wouldn't have to trust the delta...


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum