Photos of Anchors Setting

[Jim Cate]

Well, it took 24 pages before the anchor bashing took over...

For pity's sake, guys, this is an informative and useful thread, one of the best ever on CF. Please keep all the petty gripes and armchair engineering comments for another venue. You can make whatever choice you want for your personal anchor, and have whatever rationale for that decision... we don't care. Just let Nolex and the few others with cameras and opportunity continue to supply us with factual info.

And FWIW, the photos of the anchor with the well bent shank actually working pretty normally are fascinating and informative. What an opportunity to dispel some well known opinions!

Cheers,

Jim

[goat]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Well, it took 24 pages before the anchor bashing took over...

For pity's sake, guys, this is an informative and useful thread, one of the best ever on CF. Please keep all the petty gripes and armchair engineering comments for another venue. You can make whatever choice you want for your personal anchor, and have whatever rationale for that decision... we don't care. Just let Nolex and the few others with cameras and opportunity continue to supply us with factual info.

And FWIW, the photos of the anchor with the well bent shank actually working pretty normally are fascinating and informative. What an opportunity to dispel some well known opinions!

Cheers,

Jim

^^^^ what he said.

[bazzer]

Once again, this forum gets into the mutual admiration society and is not objective at all. It seems the more posts you have the more aggressive you are to occasional posters. Wow, I have not criitisised nolex at all, in fact if you read all the posts , which I doubt, you will see I've personally thanked him for his efforts.
I am not a armchair sailor, I have logged 3000 nm in the last eight months and seen plenty of bad anchor setting. The fact is the Mantus bent, is that the anchor you would have on your boat?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[downunder]

Originally Posted by colemj

Wow! There is one guy on the CF anchor threads that deserves a lot of apologies! JonJon, or something like that.

I don't think 690Mpa is going to make high tensile, but I don't really know where that starts - generally 850 was considered this by Rocna and others.

Mark

+1 Can't believe this has really happened without scripting.

Certainly JonJo was highly critical of the tensile strength of the Mantus shank and coped plenty of criticism for raising the valid point that Nolex has now since confirmed.

The whole issue and importance of shank tensile strength was raised initially by Rocna with their use and promotion of high tensile steel in their anchors made in NZ.

Nolex: adding the real world photos of anchors in action makes this thread one of the most valuable anchor threads.



cheers

[surfmachine]

Hi NornaBiron, dare I enquire as to what exactly is the "John method"?
Please elaborate, as I am always keen to learn more about better anchoring techniques, after many, many anchor dramas!
Cheers from Keith.
Currently anchored on my 25 Kg Bugel anchor and 70m of stainless 10mm chain in the Lagundri Bay, on the isle of Nias, 110 nautical miles west of Sumatra in the Northern Indian ocean. Sitting out 27 knot squalls with blinding tropical rain for most of the night!!!!!!

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Sulaire

Probably a case of asking too much really , but if anyone has had any luck , i would be interested to know?

Charlie

Hello Charlie,

My wife has promised that she will bring my new Hookah system on her next trip over. Hey, how about contributing some Ultra pictures?

Cheers

Ken

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by bazzer

Once again, this forum gets into the mutual admiration society and is not objective at all. It seems the more posts you have the more aggressive you are to occasional posters. Wow, I have not criitisised nolex at all, in fact if you read all the posts , which I doubt, you will see I've personally thanked him for his efforts.
I am not a armchair sailor, I have logged 3000 nm in the last eight months and seen plenty of bad anchor setting. The fact is the Mantus bent, is that the anchor you would have on your boat?


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

'Sounds like it's time for you to jump into the water and take some pictures. I mean this in a positive way.

Poop happens down where the anchor lies.

Ken

[Sulaire]

Hi kenomac

I would take pictures but at the moment we are in similar holding to noelex and the ultra has completely buried its self, not a trace to be seen!

Hope all is well with you and yours, get over to greece it is paradise!

Charlie.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Alan Mighty]

Originally Posted by bazzer

If a anchor, any anchor, will not easily break free from the bottom, hauling on it until it bends is not a good idea. At this stage a trip line is advisable to reverse the pull.

I'm with Bazzer. And recommend use of a trip line.

Professor John H. Knox reckoned that a anchor set by power or wind to its maximum static holding force needs 60% of that force to pull it out, if you are relying on an upward pull from the cable at scope of 1:1.

I've graduated from (1) using a tag line to which I could attach a buoy when I chose to (2) using a trip line.

Current trip line is 10 metres with an eye spliced in the tail. I scow that eye to the chain, with a short strip of double-sided velcro. When I lay anchor, I scow the trip line to the chain. As I recover the rode, I un-scow the trip line and trip the anchor manually when the chain is up-and-down.

Al

[Kenomac]

Today's latest Ultra pictures. Very little wind over the past two days, the anchor hasn't moved.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Alan Mighty

I'm with Bazzer. And recommend use of a trip line.

Al

Nolex 77 and I both have permanently attached trip lines 6ft long with a float. if the anchor was really stuck good, all that either of us needs to do is dive down 10ft or so and attach a line in order to haul the anchor up from the rear.

Ken

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

Nolex 77 and I both have permanently attached trip lines 6ft long with a float. if the anchor was really stuck good, all that either of us needs to do is dive down 10ft or so and attach a line in order to haul the anchor up from the rear.

Ken

Dunno about you, Ken, but we frequently anchor in depths of 35-50 feet. This makes diving down to attach a trip line a bit more challenging, at least for me. To say nothing of low water temperatures which seem to plague us at times, making the whole diving issue less attractive.

And unless one uses a pretty stout trip line, even pulling the anchor out backwards, if it is buried way deeply will likely overstress the line.

So, this leaves one needing a line long enough to reach the surface if it is to be universally useful, for it to be strong enough to really pull on the anchor, and be buoyed in such a way that some wanker won't use it for a mooring or cut it with his prop. A daunting situation!

Fortunately we have never yet been unable to retrieve an anchor that was merely buried. Stuck under cables, stuck under mooring blocks, stuck in coral heads... yes indeed! But not just buried in the sand or mud. Touch wood...

All this said, we have occasionally buoyed our hooks. When anchoring expecting a cyclonic passage, when anchoring in a known foul area and once when we had to dump the chain and temporarily abandon our tackle.

Cheers,'

Jim

[noelex 77]

Another boat in the anchorage today.
This one has a Brittany anchor. This is quite a popular anchor in Europe, especially with French sailors. It is an inexpensive anchor.

It is a bit like a Danforth, but without the stock. It also shares a lot of properties with the Danforth in that it has very high holding power in soft bottoms, but struggles a bit in other substrates. It seems better than the Danforth in coping with changes in direction of pull, but it is still not as good in this regard as most anchors. It is a good cheap stern anchor (but get a Fortress if you can afford it). The lack of a wide stock makes it a bit easier to store and deploy in this role.

Anyway it was well dropped with a careful layout of chain. 5.5m @ 6:1. The "set" consisted of arresting the boats rearward momentum.

The chain was at moderately shallow angle so it was providing a some resistance without any signs of skips or jerks.

There has been little wind and the Mantus is unchanged.

This was the result for the Brittany:

It has done a reasonable job. There is not a great deal of fluke area under the sand, but a bit more setting force would likely fix this. The fluke is only in the initial top layer of sand which tends to be quite soft so there is still some question mark if it will cope with the firmer sand underneath if the wind picks up. The whole drag mark cannot be seen in the photos, but was about 4m, reasonably typical for this anchor.

[redsky49]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Another boat in the anchorage today.
This one has a Brittany anchor. This is quite a popular anchor in Europe, especially with French sailors. It is an inexpensive anchor.

It is a bit like a Danforth, but without the stock. It also shares a lot of properties with the Danforth in that it has very high holding power in soft bottoms, but struggles a bit in other substrates. It seems better than the Danforth in coping with changes in direction of pull, but it is still not as good in this regard as most anchors. It is a good cheap stern anchor (but get a Fortress if you can afford it). The lack of a wide stock makes it a bit easier to store and deploy in this role.

Anyway it was well dropped with a careful layout of chain. 5.5m @ 6:1. The "set" consisted of arresting the boats rearward momentum.

The chain was at moderately shallow angle so it was providing a some resistance without any signs of skips or jerks.

There has been little wind and the Mantus is unchanged.

This was the result for the Brittany:

It has done a reasonable job. There is not a great deal of fluke area under the sand, but a bit more setting force would likely fix this. The fluke is only in the initial top layer of sand which tends to be quite soft so there is still some question mark if it will cope with the firmer sand underneath if the wind picks up. The drag mark cannot be seen in the photos, but was about 4m, reasonably typical for this anchor.

For those not familiar with this anchor (typically US sailors), while sharing some characteristics with the Danforth type, there are substantial differences. This anchor relies on anchor weight far more then the Danforth. The flukes are quite thick and it will not dive nearly as readily as the Danforth. The stock, the weak point on many Danforths, is massively thicker on the Brittany.
My experience with this anchor has been mixed, though I frankly didn't use it enough to make valid assumptions regarding it. Owners of French boats may have seen this anchor as standard equipment on some models, in my case a Wauquiez Centurion 40 (great boat by the way).

[JPA Cate]

redsky49,

Thanks for the picture. I looks a stout anchor.

Ann