Rocna's new anchor/ Hey, Anchor thread!!!

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Fortress

That has been the reason for failure in vast majority of cases I have heard about during the past 18+ years while working with Fortress, and sometimes with competitive anchors as well.

If you know any specifics about the above, they would be interesting to know.

Another reason for a failure, and a commonly overlooked one, can simply be poor setting technique.

Safe anchoring,
Brian

In Cuttyhunk, the problem was most likely either weed or shells jamming the flukes. That is one area I definitely would not use a Danforth-style anchor as a primary.

Brian, regarding a previous comment of yours, I have yet to ever see an oyster shell jam a single fluke, non-pivoting anchor. Nor a rather modest amount of weed. I have seen Danforth-style anchors (including Fortresses) foiled by such.

I did see a picture of a giant boulder stuck in a Bruce once. I actually think a Danforth-style would have slipped right under that instead.

Mark

[skipgundlach]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

Maybe not "normal" but I have seen a Fortress FX-11 completely buried in sand during a kedging operation. Took one hell of a lot to get it out. I recall we used a 45 foot twin engine cruiser and there was great concern about pulling a cleat out of the transom.

That's astounding.

Our 45'LOD,44,000 pound boat was salvaged off a shelf from 60° starboard list, over its 7' draft keel in 3' of water, to 60° port, and dragged 200' on its two forward cleats. I can't imagine the pull needed to dislodge those cleats - or the horses needed to develop that pull...

Pictures: Flying Pig Is Aloft - The Adventure Begins/Chapter_2_-_Crash_Landing/Chapter_3_-_Good_GIRL

[Fortress]

Originally Posted by colemj

In Cuttyhunk, the problem was most likely either weed or shells jamming the flukes. That is one area I definitely would not use a Danforth-style anchor as a primary.

Brian, regarding a previous comment of yours, I have yet to ever see an oyster shell jam a single fluke, non-pivoting anchor. Nor a rather modest amount of weed. I have seen Danforth-style anchors (including Fortresses) foiled by such.

I did see a picture of a giant boulder stuck in a Bruce once. I actually think a Danforth-style would have slipped right under that instead.

Mark

Mark,

It is obvious that two large flukes are likely to come up with much more sea bottom than a single narrow fluke, particularly if a serious load is applied and the sediment becomes compacted and compressed tightly against the flukes.

Case in point are images of the 10 lb Fortress FX-16 after it held to over 1,500 lbs while set at the 45° angle during the Chesapeake Bay testing. After both pulls, it took over 20 minutes to recover the anchor.

By contrast, none of the 44-46 lb single fluke anchors held to close that amount (many not even 50%), and after almost every pull, they came up with minimal resistance and as clean as a whistle.

During this testing, we pulled up a CQR that had fouled with an oyster shell stuck to its sharp tip.

Much appreciated,
Brian

[Training Wheels]

Those pictures make me really appreciate the nice sand bottoms where we sail!


Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Jim Cate]

Over the years we've dredged up an assortment of debris with an assortment of anchor types. Long ago in SF Bay, using a HT Danforth we collected a large automobile tire, several tin cans (on th points of the flukes) and assorted shells jammed into the hinge area. Later, with a CQR we got a tin over the point of the plow. Segueing to a Bruce, we gathered stones and coral lumps into the "hand". This happened fairly often, especially in New Caledonia where lots of anchorages have coral rubble scattered about. I learned to recognize the tell-tale 'bumpity-bump" that you could feel in the chain when that happened. Switched to a Manson Supreme, and have collected a pair of board shorts, discarded wire rope, assorted old mooring blocks, cables, and yes, a stainless kitchen sink!

So, my take is that any anchor style can suffer fouling. In most cases if you set with considerable power it is obvious that something is wrong and investigation will reveal the problem. Some fouling is only discovered when attempts to retrieve the hook are stymied. No danger of dragging there, but it can be frustrating.

Anchors... ya gotta love them, but sometimes, well, not so much!

Jim

[downunder]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

Maybe not "normal" but I have seen a Fortress FX-11 completely buried in sand during a kedging operation. Took one hell of a lot to get it out. I recall we used a 45 foot twin engine cruiser and there was great concern about pulling a cleat out of the transom.

Agreed there is plenty of evidence of The Fortress anchors diving beneath the surface.

I was asking about the roll bar type anchors???

[Jim Cate]

I was asking about the roll bar type anchors???

Generally the water clarity over mud bottoms isn't so great, and the prospect of diving for inspection even worse, so I don't have direct viewing data for our Manson Supreme roll bar anchor. But, in soft mud, when extracted the shank is often completely sheathed in mud, and the chain as well, for a couple of meters or so. Circumstantial evidence for sure, but it appears that the anchor and some chain were indeed buried in the seabed.

Cheers,

jim

[downunder]

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

Generally the water clarity over mud bottoms isn't so great, and the prospect of diving for inspection even worse, so I don't have direct viewing data for our Manson Supreme roll bar anchor. But, in soft mud, when extracted the shank is often completely sheathed in mud, and the chain as well, for a couple of meters or so. Circumstantial evidence for sure, but it appears that the anchor and some chain were indeed buried in the seabed.

Cheers,

jim

Thanks Jim, I have now doubt any anchor type will bury in mud bottoms. Asking about roll bar types diving in other cruising areas. sand etc.

Cheers.

[noelex 77]

A number of posters have commented on problems with Danforth/Fortress style anchors not responding well to a change in direction of force.

Looking at anchors underwater, I have seen problems with these style of anchors when rotating around to a new direction. My observations indicate that when rotating they will occasionally develop a very high list even when they set well initially. This does not happen on every rotation, but it occurs often enough to concern me.

It is disconcerting to watch. The anchor will usually reset with the owner unaware that a problem has occurred, but it can sometimes drag for long distances seemingly stable in this position.

To a certain extent this is a matter of degree. All anchors develop some list as they rotate and all are more vulnerable to breaking out while this is occurring. However, in my opinion, the Danforth/Fortress does not respond to changes in the direction of pull as well as many other designs, and the difference is significant.

On the other hand, this style of anchor has exceptional holding ability in soft substrates. My recommendation would be to use a Danforth/Fortress style of anchor when you are reasonably sure the direction of pull will remain relatively constant. I have a Fortress as secondary/stern/kedge anchor and I think it is ideal in this role. The very light weight is a major advantage. It is much easier to row out in the dinghy and in an emergency the anchor can even be swum out using just a small fender for buoyancy.

Personally, I would be reluctant to use it as a primary anchor. As well as the rotational problems that concern me, in my opinion this style of anchor does not cope with hard substrates and weed as well as many other modern anchors and versatility is major asset for a primary anchor.

The above, of course, are all only my opinions. YMMV.

[Jim Cate]

Personally, I would be reluctant to use it as a primary anchor. As well as the rotational problems that concern me, in my opinion this style of anchor does not cope with hard substrates and weed as well as many other modern anchors and versatility is major asset for a primary anchor.

Nolex, seems to me that these difficult substrates are where the light weight as well as the design act against the successful setting of the otherwise excellent Fortress. As you have noted several times, a lot of weight forcing the tips down is a big help in starting the burying process.

We use an ancient 20H high tensile Danforth for our stern and kedge anchor. I'd be happy to swap it for a Fortress in those usages. By t he time one gets 10 metres of 10 mm chain and that anchor into the dinghy one tends to be fatigued a bit, and then chucking it carefully over without the catenary dragging the dink backwards a long way is a problem that a lighter anchor would help solve.

The Fortress surely has its place!

Jim

[noelex 77]

Yes, I agree. We have a Fortress and use it for the same purpose.

The lighter weight is a major bonus. Even most other aluminium anchors are heavier because they incorporate a lead tip. Only the so called "fluke" aluminium anchors are a similar weight eg the Guardian (which is a less expensive version of the Fortress), the FOB light, and the Manson Racer.

It makes a difference if you have carry the anchor into the dinghy, especially for those applications (such as keeping the bow pointed into the swell) where not much chain is needed.

[Fortress]

Glad to have all of you fine gentlemen and serious cruisers as customers!

I think this discussion has taken a wee bit of a thread drift, how about that new Rocna!

Be safe,
Brian

[colemj]

Originally Posted by downunder

Thanks Jim, I have now doubt any anchor type will bury in mud bottoms. Asking about roll bar types diving in other cruising areas. sand etc.

Cheers.

As mentioned earlier, by definition all anchors will bury into the substrate only as much as needed to resist the force pulling on them. In mud, this requires burying the anchor quite a ways at times. In most other substrates, this only requires the flukes to be buried. There is no way to bury them any further without massive force.

There is also no need for them to be buried any further.

In soft sand, we have seen our Rocna buried to the top of its roll bar. Noelex's anchor thread shows several pictures of his Mantus, Spades and several others also buried almost all the way to the top. All of these were in softer sand.

In firm sand, our Rocna buries only its fluke and will not release under any amount of force we have been able to apply to it. Even when positioned directly over the anchor, it often will not release until we motor over it and force it backwards. I say this not to endorse the Rocna, but to show that any anchor only needs to bury as far as necessary and not more.

Mark

[colemj]

Originally Posted by Fortress

Glad to have all of you fine gentlemen and serious cruisers as customers!

And don't take my criticism or questioning the wrong way - I am happy to be one of your customers. I find your product an excellent choice as a secondary specialty anchor.

I'm not in the camp of needing many different anchors for different bottom types. One good primary anchor of new generation design and a properly sized Fortress is really all one needs.

Mark

[Fortress]

Originally Posted by colemj

And don't take my criticism or questioning the wrong way - I am happy to be one of your customers. I find your product an excellent choice as a secondary specialty anchor.

I'm not in the camp of needing many different anchors for different bottom types. One good primary anchor of new generation design and a properly sized Fortress is really all one needs.

Mark

Mark,

Its all good. I think we can all learn something from these discussions, and at the end of the day, what is most important is from the knowledge we gain, we are able to stay safe while on the water.

Brian