A new use for your bow eye.....

[GFC]

One of the many emails I get from a variety of boat companies is one from Active Captain. They send it out periodically with tips on a variety of boat topics. This information below is from their newsletter that I received today.

It discusses using your bow eye when anchoring in a crowded area to reduce the amount of scope needed, thus reducing the amount your boat will swing on its rode if the wind changes. I thought it was interesting so I'm passing it on to you.

Tell me what you think. Good idea, or useless information.

Which brings us to bow eyes. Putting a bow eye on your boat down close to the water line provides a wonderful advantage when anchoring. In general, a three-stranded line is attached properly to the bow eye and brought up to the bow ending with some type of chain attachment device.

Chain hooks, locks, and gadgets would easily make another newsletter topic. When you've put out enough rode, you attach the line to the chain and release chain until the line is holding the chain fully. The chain on the bow should also be locked in case the line breaks.

In this setup, the line is acting like an elastic snubber while making the bow attach point as low as possible. This will greatly reduce rode distance especially if you have a high bow.

Here's an example with Red Head and it's 10 foot bow. Let's say we're anchored in 6 feet of water at high tide and we want 5:1 scope. In our setup today without a bow eye, the amount of rode to release would be: (6 + 10) * 5 = 80 feet.

But if we had a bow eye 1 foot off the water line, our 5:1 scope requirement would change to: (6 + 1) * 5 = 35. That's less than half the rode needed to provide the same level of holding. Note that scope includes the 15 or so feet for the bow eye line so only 20 feet of chain would be let out. 20 feet!

This is why many trawlers have a bow eye with a line running up to their bow. They're trying to be better citizens to use less anchor swing when anchored in proximity of other boats.

Bow eyes require some engineering. You're not going to attach one with 2 wood screws and some 5200. It takes a significant backing plate and analysis to make sure the bow eye will hold the full weight of the boat in the wind.

And speaking of 5:1 and 7:1 scope, yes, we know that this is an east coast and Caribbean thing. In other places where anchoring is done in very deep water, putting out 5:1 scope would be ridiculous. Imagine anchoring in 90 feet of water which is not uncommon in the Pacific Northwest.

Thanks Active Captain.

 

[Lou_tribal]

Lead me to one question... Usually what are you using your bow eye for? I have one on my boat and never used it yet.

 

[rwidman]

Lead me to one question... Usually what are you using your bow eye for? I have one on my boat and never used it yet.

It's to pull the boat onto a trailer and secure it. I'm not sure many of us trailer our boats though.


And to the OP, in my opinion it's "useless information".

 

[Coastal Cruiser]

I use my bow eye as described by Jeff/Active Captain most of the time when anchoring. It effectively and substantially increases the scope ratio. Why not use it?

 

[foggysail]

One of the many emails I get from a variety of boat companies is one from Active Captain. They send it out periodically with tips on a variety of boat topics. This information below is from their newsletter that I received today.

It discusses using your bow eye when anchoring in a crowded area to reduce the amount of scope needed, thus reducing the amount your boat will swing on its rode if the wind changes. I thought it was interesting so I'm passing it on to you.

Tell me what you think. Good idea, or useless information.

Which brings us to bow eyes. Putting a bow eye on your boat down close to the water line provides a wonderful advantage when anchoring. In general, a three-stranded line is attached properly to the bow eye and brought up to the bow ending with some type of chain attachment device.

Chain hooks, locks, and gadgets would easily make another newsletter topic. When you've put out enough rode, you attach the line to the chain and release chain until the line is holding the chain fully. The chain on the bow should also be locked in case the line breaks.

In this setup, the line is acting like an elastic snubber while making the bow attach point as low as possible. This will greatly reduce rode distance especially if you have a high bow.

Here's an example with Red Head and it's 10 foot bow. Let's say we're anchored in 6 feet of water at high tide and we want 5:1 scope. In our setup today without a bow eye, the amount of rode to release would be: (6 + 10) * 5 = 80 feet.

But if we had a bow eye 1 foot off the water line, our 5:1 scope requirement would change to: (6 + 1) * 5 = 35. That's less than half the rode needed to provide the same level of holding. Note that scope includes the 15 or so feet for the bow eye line so only 20 feet of chain would be let out. 20 feet!

This is why many trawlers have a bow eye with a line running up to their bow. They're trying to be better citizens to use less anchor swing when anchored in proximity of other boats.

Bow eyes require some engineering. You're not going to attach one with 2 wood screws and some 5200. It takes a significant backing plate and analysis to make sure the bow eye will hold the full weight of the boat in the wind.

And speaking of 5:1 and 7:1 scope, yes, we know that this is an east coast and Caribbean thing. In other places where anchoring is done in very deep water, putting out 5:1 scope would be ridiculous. Imagine anchoring in 90 feet of water which is not uncommon in the Pacific Northwest.

Thanks Active Captain.

Sure-- the math is correct (without considering tide) but how many boats have you encountered in an anchorage with a bow 10' off the water?

 

[Larry M]

Our anchor roller is 9' off the water. Am I ready to add one, no, but it seems a lot of Norhavn's have them.

 

[Xsbank]

I don't like it either, a bow eye usually penetrates the hull and has nuts on the inside of the hull. It is also too close to the water and the result, beyond cracked gel coat, could be a leak. You will always have a line coming from the eye to someplace on the foredeck and if you drop the bugger it will be difficult to lean out to retrieve it with a boat hook.

Now an anchor snubber is very important, two lengths of large diameter line going to a chain hook while the bitter ends are tied to the bow cleats. Get someone's cast-off mooring lines. Takes all the weight off that expensive chain retriever that lives on the bow. The last thing you ever want to do is bend that shaft.

When does anybody ever care about an extra 10' of rode??

 

[kchace]

I don't have a bow eye on this boat, but can appreciate the reduced need for anchor rode to have the same scope. My anchor roller is 8' off the water. So in a relatively shallow anchorage, a bow eye could make a big difference. Adding one will always be in my toolbox if it turns out it can help with normal anchoring.

Ken

 

[Britannia]

...

When does anybody ever care about an extra 10' of rode??

It's actually 10' times your scope - so could be 50-70' of rode.

Nevertheless, I have a bow that's 10' off the water and I don't think I would ever bother with one. I never let out less than 100' of chain in any depth - it's less that two boat-lengths after all. I have plenty of chain and would rather have the simplicity of a normal snubber.

A neighbor has pointed out that if the snubber breaks with this setup, the resulting impact load is now occurring higher up with less scope. The likelihood is that the anchor will break free. He's had it happen.

Richard

 

[markpierce]

An anchor snubber largely meets the role.



Wondering how one works with bow eye while in water, offshore??

 

[MurrayM]

A neighbor has pointed out that if the snubber breaks with this setup, the resulting impact load is now occurring higher up with less scope. The likelihood is that the anchor will break free. He's had it happen.

Good point.

 

[markpierce]

The anchor is most likely to fail first. Better than the bow fitting pulling out, possibly creating a hull breach.

 

[Britannia]

An anchor snubber largely meets the role.



Wondering how one works with bow eye while in water, offshore??

I think the conventional snubber setup can give a false sense of better scope. Once the wind picks up enough for scope to matter, the snubber will tighten up, the chain will come out of the water and the scope will be the same as if the snubber had never been installed.

For the bow eye setup, I think people leave the line looped through while underway rather than try to thread it through while anchoring.

Richard

 

[rwidman]

I use my bow eye as described by Jeff/Active Captain most of the time when anchoring. It effectively and substantially increases the scope ratio. Why not use it?

Many of our boats don't have bow eyes and many that do are hard to reach from the deck.

Personally, I want to just be able to drop the anchor, cleat the rode, set the anchor and be done with it. Not make anchoring into a major project.

 

[Lou_tribal]

Many of our boats don't have bow eyes and many that do are hard to reach from the deck.

Personally, I want to just be able to drop the anchor, cleat the rode, set the anchor and be done with it. Not make anchoring into a major project.

Indeed on mine the bow eye is just impossible to reach from the deck.

 

[Britannia]

Many of our boats don't have bow eyes and many that do are hard to reach from the deck.

Personally, I want to just be able to drop the anchor, cleat the rode, set the anchor and be done with it. Not make anchoring into a major project.

Indeed on mine the bow eye is just impossible to reach from the deck.

Just attach a line at the dock and leave it looped through while underway.

 

[koliver]

When I had a sailboat with a bowsprit, the Bobstay attachment at the hull allowed me to attach a snubber at the water line. As it seemed like a good idea, I tried it once. I sailed that boat 6 years, but never tried it again, as it was just that much extra work and inconvenience for no discernible advantage.
Now bear in mind that I am in BC, so my typical anchorage is 30 to 60 ft deep, so getting the attachment point off of a bow that is only 5 ft off the water just isn't that important. Those in shallow water, with higher bows, may have more reason to persevere.

 

[GFC]

Brittania nailed it. You make up the line that will run from your bow eye while you are tied to a dock. Attach it to your bow eye and loop it up over your bow rail or to somewhere else where its easy to grab while you are anchoring.

Personally, I want to just be able to drop the anchor, cleat the rode, set the anchor and be done with it. Not make anchoring into a major project.

Wes, if you had this line set up from your bow eye up to your bow rail, you would follow the same process you outlined above except you would attach the line instead of cleating the rode. It doesn't make anchoring any more of a project.

 

[HenryD]

My boat has a padeye about a foot above the waterline. Our bow is 10' above the waterline. I have a 30' snubber attached to the padeye. We use it to anchor every time we anchor. We do get called on the radio often telling us we have a line hanging for the bow. The reduced scope is helpful in tight anchorages. The 8 plait snubber provides a surge absorber and reduces the sound of the anchor chain moving side to side in the roller.

 

[psneeld]

If you anchor in tight anchorages whether boats, shoreline or shallows crowd you....it could come in handy and I too have considered adding a bow eye.....

Especially if your bow is high and you anchor in shallow, tight spots.

It is also handy for towing as there is no chafing worry.

Adding a bow eye is not rocket science and no more threat to leak if done properly than any other thru hull penetration.

 

[DHeckrotte]

Does anybody have anything nice to say about using a kellet on the rode? A weight allowed to slide down the rode and effectively shorten the scope.

I just Googled and there's a variety of opinion.

I've seen 'em marketed but never sprung for one.

 

[MurrayM]

Does anybody have anything nice to say about using a kellet on the rode? A weight allowed to slide down the rode and effectively shorten the scope.

I just Googled and there's a variety of opinion.

I've seen 'em marketed but never sprung for one.

Tempting, but would prove useless and a pain in the arse to get back aboard if the wind piped up. I'd also be worried about it getting hung up on the many waterlogged trees we have on the bottom around here.

I can see their use however if you know the bottom is baby bum smooth and there's no chance of wind.

 

[foggysail]

I missed something in my boating life. The only local boats that I can think of whose bows are 10' above the water line are the commercial fishing boats in New Bedford Harbor.

But be that as it may, I can remember with clear FEAR many times when our so called "anchor" at the time slipped. Those events created fire drills onboard by first getting the engines started removing the snubber from the all chain rode and retrieving the anchor before we collided with something.

So if I had a boat that found even 10' critical in anchoring, for sure I would never add to a potential fire drill trying to drop the line from a bow eye, remove the snubber and...... NO WAY!!!

For those who feel this is beneficial, GOOD LUCK!

 

[Benthic2]

...but if there's no chance of wind....you don't really need the kellet.....or the 5:1 scope.

 

[Capt.Bill11]

I think the conventional snubber setup can give a false sense of better scope. Once the wind picks up enough for scope to matter, the snubber will tighten up, the chain will come out of the water and the scope will be the same as if the snubber had never been installed.

For the bow eye setup, I think people leave the line looped through while underway rather than try to thread it through while anchoring.

Richard

Plus most people's snubbers are to short and made up of to heavy a line.

 

[foggysail]

It's actually 10' times your scope - so could be 50-70' of rode.

I never let out less than 100' of chain in any depth - it's less that two boat-lengths after all. I have plenty of chain and would rather have the simplicity of a normal snubber.


Your neighbors must love you in shallow water harbors. So with your boat length of 54' plus about 100' of chain in 5' water you have a swing radius of 150' thereabout. That is ridiculous!

Our harbors are so crowded, I doubt you will be able to find just dropping that much scope especially on a busy weekend.

 

[Britannia]

It's actually 10' times your scope - so could be 50-70' of rode.

I never let out less than 100' of chain in any depth - it's less that two boat-lengths after all. I have plenty of chain and would rather have the simplicity of a normal snubber.


Your neighbors must love you in shallow water harbors. So with your boat length of 54' plus about 100' of chain in 5' water you have a swing radius of 150' thereabout. That is ridiculous!

Our harbors are so crowded, I doubt you will be able to find just dropping that much scope especially on a busy weekend.

I draw 5.5' and so don't anchor in less than about 8' of water. Our tides are around 6-7' here so that means I'm never in less than 15' at high tide. My bow is 10' off the water so that means 25' at high tide. I'm only talking about a 4:1 scope - so what I'm saying is not excessive for here.

Our anchorages are not that crowded - I guess we're lucky. I wouldn't want to be jammed in with lots of other boats.

Richard

 

[Peter B]

Sure-- the math is correct (without considering tide) but how many boats have you encountered in an anchorage with a bow 10' off the water?

Fair comment, but here's the more intriguing question. Going by the example used, that of setting the anchor at the recommended ratio of 5 times the depth, which is the more logical..?

To add the height of the roller from the water to the depth as measured, then let out 5 times that, which in the example ended up a whopping difference compared to if the take-off is nearer the waterline, ie 80' versus 35', or...

...is the convention more easily achieved, and close enough for jazz, by just letting out the rode to 5 times the measured depth, then adding the extra however many feet one knows one's roller is above the water..?

Because I suspect that's what most of us do, and it makes quite a difference, doesn't it..? Does the difference really matter, unless expecting a nasty weather change, in which case, very different action would be taken..?

 

[Britannia]

Fair comment, but here's the more intriguing question. Going by the example used, that of setting the anchor at the recommended ratio of 5 times the depth, which is the more logical..?

To add the height of the roller from the water to the depth as measured, then let out 5 times that, which in the example ended up a whopping difference compared to if the take-off is nearer the waterline, ie 80' versus 35', or...

...is the convention more easily achieved, and close enough for jazz, by just letting out the rode to 5 times the measured depth, then adding the extra however many feet one knows one's roller is above the water..?

Because I suspect that's what most of us do, and it makes quite a difference, doesn't it..? Does the difference really matter, unless expecting a nasty weather change, in which case, very different action would be taken..?

Scope is properly measured from the point of attachment on the boat and not the waterline. If you let out 5 times the depth plus the height of the roller above the water, you will be using less than 5:1 scope. That may be just fine for your situation, but it's not 5:1 scope. If you were in 10' of water and 5' bow height then you'd have 55' feet instead of 75'. That would be about 3.7:1 rather than 5:1 scope.

Richard

 

[markpierce]

With an all-chain rode, I can see the practicality of using a nylon snubber running through the near-waterline eye. Haven't seen the need, however.