Anchor Scope Illustrated

manyboats said:

But still the weight of the chain reduces anchor performance by preloading the anchor. And 95% of the extra pull on the anchor would not be there w nylon rode.

Click to expand...

Where is that dead horse thing when you need one?

Rick B wrote;

"Finally ... what is still missing is the fact that with adequate scope there is some amount of chain lying on the bottom. Assuminmg the bottom is flat, the catenary ends at the point the chain touches the bottom. As long as some length of chain lies on the bottom, there is no strain on the anchor."

Under what conditions? A 40' boat w 3/8ths chain in a 20 mph breeze? You bring up a very important point that is at the opposite end of the "bar tight" theory. With that 40' boat anchored at 5-1 in 40' of water and 3/8ths chain what amount of wind would just lift the chain off the bottom? But a better question would be is all the chain off the bottom in a 50 knot gale? That's where anchor performance becomes really important.

Tom yes I've done a lot of that 3-1 and occasionally 2-1 stuff and w little chain. But I always go 4 or 5-1 in a blow. All on the NW coast.

Walt if you set those horses right side up you may have a horse race.

Except for AusCan this is a little like talk'in to the wall. Has anyone got anything to say that will prove or disprove my theory. And if you don't have a grip on the theory at this point you may as well get off the train.

OK enough for today. I'm waiting for somebody to start thinking and shoot down my theory. Thousands of years of boating says it must be wrong but I can't figure out why.

Eric

At 3 to 1 scope using nylon in a 20 knot blow how much of that rode is off the ground, placing tension onto the anchor.

Compared to all chain in a 20 knot blow at a 3 to 1 scope ?

Change this to 4 to 1 or 5 to 1 the nylon rode will always be engaging the anchor much sooner than chain.

I might even be tempted to use a kellet on nylon rode to help give the anchor a better attack angle on the bottom at 3 to 1.

Sure at 7 to 1 a kellet is not going to add much but at 3 to 1 it will.

I know my bad but you have this backwards. Just take a look at the difference in how the rode is coming off the bow on any boat in a breeze at anchor. Chain will hold uprite off the bow when nylon will angle off.

manyboats said:

Under what conditions?

Click to expand...

If is that critical, get one of these and start keeping records:

Eric, you and I both use line/chain combo for anchoring.

Why do we put a half boat length of chain between the anchor and the line?

Chafe protection is only one reason.

Thank God I'm on Manyboats "ignore list" ... phew...for a minute I thought I was loosing it.

Posted several times and referenced more ...is a study that used MATH...not guessing (well I guess all science starts with a guess), not backyard engineering thinking of cars and anchoring situtations that just don't exist...so maybe there was a "thinker" that was a missed opportunity...

Ohhhh I guess if it disagrees with you...no wonder it's on a ignore list.....but wait!

That study suggests that all chain is BAD!!!! So why would it be ignored???? I don't know..I just know the final conclusion was the same flippin' conclusion that most of us already know...that whether nylon or chain...it takes a combination of both to survive storm conditions without ridiculous amounts of scope or chain that would sink the boat.

The real thinkers know the truth is somewhere's in between ....and it depends on how you set up your ground tackle and actually use it that matters the most.

And most "trawler cruisers" usually aren't going toe to toe with storm conditions (yes there are some that see storm conditions regularly) on a regular basis so they gear up for comfortable cruising and get "extra" prepared if they have to wait out a hurricane someplace.

Rick I was just ask'in.

Craig I thought the main reason chain was used on a mostly line rode was to make the line droop and lessen the angle of pull on the anchor. Like a Kellet.

psneeld You're not on my ignore list if that's what you want to know nor is anyone else. If it gets too bad here I'll just leave.
Don't recall your study. When your'e in your unhappy mode I tend to not read your posts so may have missed it that way. Sounds good though.

Perhaps many haven't read the question or (more likely) don't understand it.


Here is my first attempt to explain my thinking.

"Nsail,
No there isn't. I have thought about this in the past but not to any great depth. But earlier today talking about catenary I thought about it a bit more and yes as far as I can see now it may mean that lots of chain may be reducing anchoring performance.

Consider a chain fastened to two cars. How much tension will it take to pull that chain up off the ground and make it reasonably straight? If the chain is what trawler skippers usually use anchoring at 5-1 scope as they say they do and the water was 43' deep it would require about 250' of rode. If that rode was 5/16" chain and the chain was fairly straight How much tension do you suppose it would be exerting on the 2 cars? I'm thinking hundreds of pounds but it could even be more.

Now lets imagine a trawler at anchor w the wind blowing hard. There is a lot of tension on the rode. The boat is pulling on the rode because of the wind and current (if there is any). The pull is transmitted to the anchor. But also the weight of the chain (200lbs?) is pulling on the boat and the anchor. Perhaps hundreds of pounds. So the anchor needs to resist the tension resulting from the weight of the chain AND the pull of the boat in the wind.

Nylon anchor line weighs nothing compared to chain so it would seem to me that chain on the anchor rode may have 100 or perhaps several hundred pounds of pull being exerted on the anchor that would not be there if the rode were nylon.

This pull from chain weight is probably more negative than the catenary is positive. Especially in extreme conditions. So as long as you can get an anchor to set it looks like chain would help dislodge it and the more tension on the rode the greater the force that is trying to break out the anchor.

I remember Marin swore by his "all chain rode" and thought his Bruce anchor was the reason he dragged. Perhaps he wouldn't have dragged had he had nylon?


Here is my second attempt to explain what was going over like a missed shot.

manyboats said:

OK nix on the cars.
Lets say you're down in the harbor and it's low tide. It's in Alaska so it's an 18' tide. You've found a pair of docks supported by pilings and they are 200' apart. You attach a chain to a piling on the north side and the south side and use a come-along to pull the chain up to the point where it's fairly straight. Perhaps 6" of catinary. Or Droop in the chain. Now there's hundreds of pounds of tension on the chain exerted to each link and to the two pilings the ends are attached to.

Now lets say the tide comes in. Is there any difference in the physics that was present at low tide? I'd say yes but not much. I think there is a small difference in the weight of the chain because water is much more dense than air. One could hang an anchor above the water and then let down until it's submerged and experience the difference. Very very little though so the tension on the ends of the chain are about the same.

The only difference between my example on the beach w the pilings and a boat at anchor is the substitution of a good solid anchor at one end of the chain and a boat at the other end w a wind blowing to bring about the necessary pull on the boat end of the chain to pull the chain up so there's 6" of catinary.

The forces are all the same and it hardly made any difference at all when the tide came in.

Now the question is whether or not there is a lot of difference in tension w the chain or w equivalent nylon line. I'd confidentially say the chain creates far far more tension.

At anchor the pull on each end of the rode from the weight of the rode is real. Part of it is from the drag of the wind or/and current and the other part is from the weight of the rode like the chain between the pilings. Lets say the pull from the weight of the chain is several hundred pounds. The pull on the anchor w nylon rode is very little compared to the chain so by using nylon instead of chain there is (I'm resisting the temptation to use the word "obviously") much less pull on the rode. So the boat using nylon under the same dynamic conditions has considerably less pull on the rode from the weight of the rode itself so can experience more drag from wind on the boat to reach the point where the anchor will break out. Clearly anchoring w a line rode is more effective.

Click to expand...

Read this....makes it all perfectly clear..

Phil posted it way back on page one and I referred to it several times...

Synthesis

I'm not saying it's all correct as it has to make assumptions too...but it correlates with every other bit of "yacht" anchoring I have experience or read so their bottom line is really close to mine...

The final point is many cruisers choose all chain for convenience....NOT necessarily anything else....but it does the job and that's all they care about.

manyboats said:

Craig I thought the main reason chain was used on a mostly line rode was to make the line droop and lessen the angle of pull on the anchor. Like a Kellet.

Click to expand...

It is but think what I'm mainly getting at is if a half a boat length of chain induces droop or centenary like a kellet, would it not be reasonable to assume an all chain rode would do the same. Right or wrong I look at the chain in my rode as a shock absorber, if all chain was practical on my boat I'd do it. If for nothing else the shock absorbing qualities alone.

Have observed while anchored in a reasonable current my rode is tight and doubt very much of my chain is in contact with the bottom. The line stretches to absorb shock loads along with the little bit of slack undoubtedly left in the chain but I would expect far more centenary to be left in an all chain rode under similar circumstances. My unscientific 2 cents based solely on my observations.

manyboats said:

When your'e in your unhappy mode I tend to not read your posts so may have missed it that way.

Click to expand...

An old adage about attracting bees with either honey or vinegar comes to mind.

Eric, the big flaw in your chain theory above is the chain is attached to 2 fixed points. That does not occur in anchoring as the only fixed point is the anchor, the boat is free floating.

Edit: the link in psneeld's post above seems to vet out in my mind most of the observed observations I've made on the subject so far with great illustrations.

CPseudonym said:

Eric, the big flaw in your chain theory above is the chain is attached to 2 fixed points. That does not occur in anchoring as the only fixed point is the anchor, the boat is free floating.

Edit: the link in psneeld's post above seems to vet out in my mind most of the observed observations I've made on the subject so far with great illustrations.

Click to expand...

I always use honey where I think it will do some good...

psneeld said:

I always use honey where I think it will do some good...

Click to expand...

It only works when it's used.

Seriously though having read Eric's combo rode posts for a long while now and find him to be a reasonably intelligent man with above average savvy. In my little pea brain at least I wonder if much of this debate boils down to a big boat/small boat sorta thing? All chain is not very practical on boats 30' and under, it starts coming into its own after 32 feet in my mind. Below that the boats can really feel the weight difference on the bow. Above say 40' the line diameters increase to the point that I really wouldn't wish to mess with rope of the diameter required for the job personally.

I've read many war stories at other sites of combo rodes parting off in anchorages in places like Mexico. Owing in big part to the chafe and rocks or coral I'm sure.

The distance between the two points of attachment (boat and anchor) is not an element of my "preload theory". It's the tension on the line or chain.

Given a fixed load (wind) on a boat w nylon line the boat exerts X amount of force against the rode and almost the same amount of force on the anchor.

Given the same wind (load) on a boat w chain the force against the boat is the same as is the force against the rode. But w the chain the weight of the chain causes pull on the boat AND pull on the anchor. So the load the anchor sees is the load from wind on the boat AND the pull of the chain. The pull of the chain from it's weight on the boat and anchor functions independently as if they were attached to pilings. So the pull on the anchor resulting from the chain weight is felt on the chain rode and not the line rode.

The weight of the chain pulls on both boat and anchor so one would think they cancel out and I'm sure they do but the pull from the weight of the chain is present only w the chain rode. But it is also present on the bow.


Craig wrote;

"Eric, the big flaw in your chain theory above is the chain is attached to 2 fixed points. That does not occur in anchoring as the only fixed point is the anchor, the boat is free floating."

I think you're barking up the right tree Craig. The attached point on one end is obviously the anchor and the attach point on the other end is the anchor cleat on the bow deck. The force against the boat MUST match the force (pull) on the anchor. That's a given I'd say. It seems to me now that the force would be the same nylon or chain rode. But they will differ re what AusCan says. But the load on the boat dosn't end at the bow cleat. It's passed on to the hull. I'm thinking now that the forces on the chain from the weight of the chain are felt only along the active length of the chain.

Unless someone else comes up w something better I'm going to accept that. So when at anchor in a wind the forces on the bow and anchor w a chain rode and a line rode are equal. But the forces of tension are much more along the chain itself just due to the weight of the chain.

So if two boats were anchored w one chain and the other line and both line and chain were equal in strength the chain rode would break first. Just because of the added weight of the chain.

So my theory was flawed or w/o merit. As I said before I knew it must be but just couldn't figure it out. The extra forces are contained within the active part of the chain.

CPseudonym said:

Why do we put a half boat length of chain between the anchor and the line?

Click to expand...

I also anchor this way but not for the reasons one might think.

1) I don't anchor much at all.

2) since I don't, I don't like packing all that "all chain" weight around.

3) About 100% of my anchoring is for a lunch hook or an hour or two of fishing.

4) Why spend all that money on chain that's just going to rust in the chain locker due to my infrequent use.

5) My bow recovers faster when I come off a wave due to the reduced weight (I had all chain) in the chain Locker.

This same line of reasoning applies to me owning a single engine, a 32 foot boat, only 200 gals of fuel available, and a 35 foot slip. Add to that, no generator, a single state room, small refrigerator and a 3000 watt inverter.

All this supports the real mission of my boat. (Not a mission I fantasize about but never do.)

Walt,

My sentiments exactly . . . . well said!

Larry

Even a lot of coastal cruisers that anchor out 365 days a year (or nearly so) don't really need storm tackle aboard....

I shoot for less than 15 knots max if I'm going to anchor out (not including thunderstors or other short term events)...so I really hope to never test my gear.

Much of the reason to anchor out will involve the dingy. When above 15 knots, it gets pretty miserable and anchor out only if I'm forced to or need to save some cash...

I anchor for pleasure and boat in conditions usually where even an emergency situation will NEVER really test my ground tackle. In those situations...if I just let her run and if it piles up into a big chain ball and anchor..99% of the time it will hold me based on what I have as gear and in the condtions I usually boat in.

manyboats said:

............"I think you're barking up the right tree Craig".

Yes, yes...finally..by George I think he's got it..!

"The attached point on one end is obviously the anchor and the attach point on the other end is the anchor cleat on the bow deck. The force against the boat MUST match the force (pull) on the anchor."

No, that bit's not right - that is only the case when almost all the rode is off the seabed, as Rick has pointed out previously, also.

"That's a given I'd say." That so-called 'given' has been your blind spot Eric.
"It seems to me now that the force would be the same nylon or chain rode. But they will differ re what AusCan says. But the load on the boat doesn't end at the bow cleat. It's passed on to the hull. I'm thinking now that the forces on the chain from the weight of the chain are felt only 'along the active length of the chain'." YES!

"Unless someone else comes up w something better I'm going to accept that. So when at anchor in a wind the forces on the bow and anchor w a chain rode and a line rode are equal. But the forces of tension are much more along the chain itself just due to the weight of the chain. Yes, but well within the chain's strength, and mostly transmitted back to the unfixed end, ie, the boat...drawing it always back towards the fixed point, the anchor. This is why your chain tensioned between cars or posts scenario is not comparable, Eric.

"So if two boats were anchored w one chain and the other line and both line and chain were equal in strength the chain rode would break first. Just because of the added weight of the chain."
Not necessarily at all, as strength per length of the correct sized chain would probably more than account for it's own weight plus equal the strength of the nylon, I would think. However, I would defer to others more expert on that. The main point being the forces on the boat have to be much higher with the heavier chain rode than a lighter synthetic rode, before they lift enough rode to to be able to exert any real tension directly on the anchor.

"So my theory was flawed or w/o merit.
As I said before I knew it must be but just couldn't figure it out. The extra forces are contained within the active part of the chain."

Click to expand...

Exactly... yes. I think you do see it now Eric.
However, knowing how you love a real world example, and to maybe set your mind at rest...just think how much less as a fraction of boat size/length/displacement, (let alone windage), an ocean-going ship's anchor is compared to our boats, yet they seldom drag anchor, as they have such humungous chain links in the rode that the anchor itself usually bears no weight at all, it's all taken up in the chain. and they don't usually put that much out either.

It's been fun, but are we there yet..?

Eric,

While I certainly respect your opinion and appreciate your posts, we are going to have to respectfully disagree on this issue. I have listened to your points, but disagree with your assumptions.

I approach this matter not as a marine engineer, but as an aeronautical engineer with a flyboy mentality with training in mathematical analysis including vector analysis and physics. No doubt there are flaws in my analysis or description, but I feel the basic foundation of this argument is solid.

1. I feel you are confusing the issue in thinking of 2 forces being applied to the rode. Think of it as 1 force being applied to the anchor. This single force applied from the boat end acts through the rode to the anchor. The manner in which the anchor reacts is dependent on the weight and mechanical properties of the rode and the anchor. Weight, elasticity, drag resistance and strength all come into play as to how the force applied at the boat end will be transmitted to the anchor shank. The reaction of the anchor is a result of the DIRECTION of the forces being applied to the anchor shank.

2. When the tension force is applied on the rode, the anchor presents a restriction to that force in the way of anchor 'friction' or drag which we refer to as 'anchor hold'. Anchors present the greatest hold when the tensile force from the boat pull is applied horizontally, or parallel to the bottom (assuming a level, flat bottom).

3. The tensile force on the line and anchor are presented from the boat in 3 dimensions; up/down, right/left and forward. Since the rode is not a rigid connection like a rod, there is no aft push in the anchor or line.

A theoretical non-elastic rode of infinite strength and zero diameter/water drag like a piano wire will apply the load immediately, directly and without resistance from the water or medium (i.e. mud) in which the rode lies. This rode would tighten like a…well…piano string and apply all the force to the anchor exactly as a sum of the directional forces being applied to the boat end. In other words, if I stood on the bow and applied 20 Lbs of force at a 45 degree vertical angle, 0 left/right force, then 14.1 lbs would be applied horizontally and 14.1 lbs vertically at the anchor shaft. The rode would be straight as an arrow at a perfect 45 degree angle. (Pythagorean’s theorem: A2+B2=C2) If we can keep the transfer of force in the horizontal plane for as long as possible, we can maximize the effectiveness of the anchor.

In the real world, we all get the benefit of two principles that help us keep this force horizontal:
a. Catenary which, thanks to gravity, forces the rode to the bottom and applies much of that force in the horizontal plane. (more from chain, less from thin, floating poly line)
b. Rode drag though the bottom mud which provides additional resistance, much like a well set anchor, to the horizontal (and to a lesser extent the vertical) forces being applied to the boat end of the anchor line. (more from chain, less from piano wire)

For the purposes of this discussion, let’s leave out the following:
1. the anchor design and its resistance to the boat’s pull since we’re really talking about the transmitter of the boat’s forces…the anchor rode,
2. abrasion issues…chain resists abrasion better than nylon rode, and
3. the bottom is level and perfectly consistent medium of mud. No rocks, no rebar and no lobster traps to foul the discussion.

Let’s focus our brains on the DIRECTION of pull and the resulting components of that force…the lateral (left/right) and vertical (high/low angles) components.

With a light, yet somewhat elastic rode like a 3-ply nylon braid, the rode will apply the load in the vertical plane sooner than a heavy chain rode would since it lacks the weight and mechanical properties to resist the vertical component of the force applied. But its elastic properties will provide shock absorption to the vertical and horizontal components of the load as it is applied.

A chain, by comparison, will lie along the bottom longer due to its greater weight and bottom “stickiness” and apply that tension in a more horizontal plane for a longer period of time than the nylon rode. But, without gravity, its lack of elasticity would apply that load more immediately and directly, without the same shock absorption. The saving graces of chain are its catenary caused by gravity which serves as a lateral and vertical shock absorber until it becomes (theoretically) piano wire tight and its “stickiness” which resists primarily the horizontal tensile force component. It’s mechanical property of acting as independent segments is also a benefit to be discussed.

An anchor provides its best resistance when the forces applied are in the horizontal plane. If all forces were horizontal, we’d all be carrying much smaller anchors. The problem is that they are not just horizontal forces. Start pulling vertically and it releases easily, like when we retrieve our anchors. Keep the forces horizontal as long as possible and we retain the greatest resistance to the tension on the rode.

If we were to create a backyard comparison to test the principles on a smaller yet more observable scale, I’d set up two wagons as the boats. Behind the wagons I’d set up two rodes: one of ¼ nylon cord and another of swingset chain. Each rode would be set 3 inches deep in wet sand and the anchor on each would be represented by a single red housing brick buried perpendicular to the rode in that sand. Each wagon handle would be attached to a scale to measure the pull (tensile) force being applied. In the first experiment, we will apply the force of the wagon smoothly, slowly and consistently to observe the differences.

Wagon A with the poly cord rode would be pulled and the first thing we’d observe is the poly cord being pulled tight out of the sand in one fluent motion as one piece since it is a single-element component and its mechanical properties limit its hold on the sand. Once the cord was tight, it would stretch ever so slightly, providing a moment of shock absorption. Additional forces applied would be transmitted directly to the brick in the sand. The vertical component would lift the brick out of its shallow grave and drag it along the surface of the wet sand at a force measured on the wagon handle scale.

Wagon B with its swingset chain rode would be pulled and the first thing we’d observe is the chain being pulled in segments out of the sand. The lifting would occur slower than the poly cord since each chain segment weighs more than its corresponding poly cord length and each segment acts independently of the other. As segments closer to the brick encounter the pull from preceding segments still buried in the sand, they apply that force in the horizontal plane until that segment begins to lift from the vertical force component. Only then does THAT segment of chain begin to lift, hinging freely on its anchor end which delays the following chain segment from lifting. This additional weight, resistance to horizontal pull and segmented lifting action postpones the transmission of the vertical component of this force, allowing the brick to remain embedded in the sand for a longer period of time. The force measured on the scale at the moment of brick release would be greater than that of Wagon A.

Now let’s look at it as a force applied not smoothly over time, but as a shock in a very short burst of force:

Wagon A rode releases from the sand and stretches, delaying the full transfer of force to the brick. When the stretch reaches its maximum, the rode then applies the force in a linear manner to the brick, pulling it out of the sand.

Wagon B rode resists the pull ever so slightly, but the rapid application of wagon pull minimizes its segmented transfer of forces and causes the chain to rip violently out of the sand in a very short period of time. There’s still a bit of catenary in the chain providing minimal shork absorption, but the effects are not pronounced. The brick pulls out of the sand in a shorter period of time with a similar force on the wagon handle. While the catenary helped in this example, its effect was reduced with the rapid application of tensile force – a shock load.

How do we regain the advantage of the chain weight and catenary when the force is applied rapidly? Add a bungee (elastic) cord to Wagon B to spread the transfer of rapidly applied forces over time. From a force analysis standpoint, it doesn’t matter if the bungee is inserted at the anchor end or the boat end. But from a rode abrasion standpoint, it makes sense to insert the stretchable bungee at the boat end.

Now Wagon B with its unstretchable, but heavy chain has a mechanical component to deliver the force over a period time which is precisely what gave the poly cord the advantage when the force was applied as an immediate, shocking tension. The advantages held by the chain rode during the normal, gradually-applied, give-and-take forces experienced in most anchoring situations is fully retained with the addition of the bungee cord. The bungee itself becomes a wear item with a limited finite lifespan, but its minimal cost and ease of replacement make it an easy component to add and replace as needed.

Wagon B’s performance can be improved with the addition of a kellet, but the added complexity to deployment and retrieval prevent its frequent use. It also is not something that can be added easily during rapidly changing conditions without hauling the anchor and starting the anchor set procedure all over again.

Another option is to utilize components of each system, rope and chain, to achieve a balance in your anchoring system to meet the needs of your waters, and style of boating. For my purposes usually anchoring in less than 20 ft of water, I find 120 ft of 5/16 chain and 240 ft of 8-ply Brait to meet my needs quite nicely. Of course, it helps to have a windlass that can handle the combo rode. YMMV.

I’m sure there are holes in my simplistic analysis and look forward to hearing about them all. But in the meantime, I’ll continue to seek solace in my (primarily) chain rode and kellet-free Claw anchor system.

Chain catenary (dare I say a nylon line would have less?):

Al and Peter,
It seems I've got you guys going now and I'm all worn out. It takes a lot of mental effort to make posts like this. Lots of editing and thinking. My head's so full of this stuff now I'm having a hard time getting into it enough to add things up.

Other than my recent load theory (that I now think is flawed) I've never strayed from thinking chain is better for anchoring boats. But I also think it's extremely heavy and very inappropriate on the bow of a boat. I think nylon line does almost as good and so why not use it? And if one must have better anchoring performance simply get a bigger anchor. I've said this many times ... that a pound spent on one's anchor results in far a greater performance increase than the same increase in weight of the chain rode.

Mark that just shows how little it takes to pull that barge.

So I'm really on the same page as everybody else but more willing to think of things not the norm ... and basically more analytical as well.

And yes Peter I can't believe what ships get away with. Perhaps the Reynolds number gets into the act. It looks like the anchors in size are small compared to the ships. It looks like if we had the same size anchor relative to the size of our boats we'd be anchoring w 8lb anchors.

Al you place heavy importance on the angle of pull on the anchor as a result of chain catenary. But we don't even know under what conditions the chain comes up off the bottom. We know now that probably the catenary is much more operative or "in the picture" than we thought before. I say this re what Rick B posted. But having a lot of catenary is far from necessary as I have anchored extensively up and down the coast w only 10 or 15' of chain. But I only use anchors that do well at short scope and therefore aren't as dependent on catenary.

I think if we were to uncover many more truths regarding scope and catenary we'd need Practical Sailor to do a rode test (line v/s chain) and a comprehensive test on scope. psneeld talked about something that addressed the issue of scope as I recall.

There is much to be learned. There is always surprises to be found and often not where we expect them. The world was once flat ... right?

FlyWright said:

I’m sure there are holes in my simplistic analysis and look forward to hearing about them all. But in the meantime, I’ll continue to seek solace in my (primarily) chain rode and kellet-free Claw anchor system.

Click to expand...

WOW! Well done! I look forward to the next edition of Chapman's where this treatise is sure to appear.

manyboats said:

"So I'm really on the same page as everybody else....

Click to expand...

SeaHorse II said:

Click to expand...

Oh please stop... You can't help it if you are not more analytical....

Walt OK maybe the same chapter.

psneeld I'm going to try out the ignore list.

HaHa it worked. You're gone.

Perfect...I love covert operations...

Thanks everyone, Flywright and Eric especially, for the well developed thought provoking contributions and intelligent constructive criticism. You helped everyone with an open mind, to understand and learn, as well as each other. It is a standout TF thread.