Anchor Weight

>Now I need to practice anchoring. I have never owned a windlass so this will be an adventure. <

The basic technique is to ONLY use the windlass to pick up the anchor from the bottom after it has been broken loose.


> Forget the weight it's holing power-setting ability-digging ability-resetting ability-structural strength. Within a particular anchor type size and weight will matter but not so important when comparing different types.<

Perhaps true in a perfect world with perfect anchoring conditions.

The real world has litter , stones and sometimes grass as well as ooze to anchor in.

The flyweight pocket anchor might hold fine , IF you dive with a shovel and bury it.

For most folks , bigger (heavier) is better as it requires less than perfect to set and hold the boat.

We too carry an aluminum anchor , but is a very large size for use as a hurricane anchor.

With days to proceed to good holding and days to set the anchors the huge surface area is a positive as a Danforth 90 would be too heavy/clumsy to bring up from below.

If you have 1 lb of anchor for every 10,000 lbs of 3 story roomaran please anchor downwind of us!

Like it or not the Fortress (as Fred says "flyweight pocket anchor") will hold a boat as advertised and there is no doubt it's clearly the highest performing anchor in the world. Some think the Rocna is. I posted an anchor test where the Rocna did poorly and I've never seen such a performance for the Fortress. And it always stacks up as having higher performance than the Rocna and everything else.

Fred says "If you have 1 lb of anchor for every 10,000 lbs of 3 story roomaran please anchor downwind of us!" ........
This your idea of the "real world"?

Fred says "If you have 1 lb of anchor for every 10,000 lbs of 3 story roomaran please anchor downwind of us!" ........
This your idea of the "real world"?

If you would like to visit with this type of individual you will find him with his watch fob hooked to a 1 inch line acting as key boat in a 40 boast raft up

The fun begins when the wind gusts to 3K!

The wind is 3000 what?

The real world is when the anchor holds or drags.

Has mostly to do w the anchor design and little to do w weight.

knots I believe....

Yea I thought about that when I was in the shower.

I have trouble w FFs stuff sometimes even if he posts the whole word.

manyboats - TMI about the shower

FF - not enough "I" for some readers...

Boating in an area of 2.5-knot and more tidal currents changing directions four times in a 24-hour period, a primary concern is that the anchor reliably reset (current direction will usually reverse two to three times during an overnight anchorage). So far, my 15 kg claw has reliably set and stayed set in the heavy mud of San Francisco estuary. (It "gets to me" when Bay Area boating writers say the claw is only suitable for rocky conditions.)

We are going to spend our first night on the hook tomorrow so spent part of the weekend reading anchor threads here to try to gain some confidence. I am now confident of at least one thing which is that there is no such thing as consensus on this subject here.
I guess I will just drop my Forfjord #12 (145 lbs) with plenty of chain (5-1) and see where I wake up. Boat weighs about 55K, less than 10 knots wind expected but about 13 foot tidal switch during the night. I plan on sleeping well unless any of you think I shouldn't.

I normally check my position several times before going to bed. If my bladder wakes me in the middle of the night, I check again.

klee wyck said:

We are going to spend our first night on the hook tomorrow. ...

Click to expand...

My first anchor launching on the Coot (with foot on the pedal):

Yes Mark, we will have 3-4 hours after we drop anchor before turning in. Planning on sleeping well and actually doing it are two totally different things. I suspect there will be many position checks.

Mark,
The Claws performance is'nt stellar in mud. However it's lack of performance in mud is no doubt regarding really loose and slimy mud. There's mud and then there's mud. I think I anchored in mud every time on my trip south from Alaska because the anchor I used probably couldn't set in anything else. Most all mud isn't the slimy ooze that gives the Claw it's imperfect reputation so it's only rare the Claw fails the user .. At least for failing in mud bottoms. But no anchor performers very well at all in slimy ooze but the Claw performs even more poorly than others ... Hence the rep.

But it's human nature to blame "something" (other than themselves) and in anchoring problems the anchor gets the blame most of the time. To my knowledge I've never had the misfortune to anchor in ooze but when I do I'll use a Danforth or some other anchor more optimized for ooze type mud. One good thing about mud is that penetration is basically assured. And that counts.

I think FF is right that having multiple types of anchors at the ready is an advantage. But some modern anchors like the SARCA, Rocna and Manson Supreme come rather close to being fully capable on all bottoms. So close that I would not find fault w a skipper that had only that one type aboard.

manyboats said:

I think FF is right that having multiple types of anchors at the ready is an advantage. But some modern anchors like the SARCA, Rocna and Manson Supreme come rather close to being fully capable on all bottoms. So close that I would not find fault w a skipper that had only that one type aboard.

Click to expand...

Here's my 2 cents worth

The new age anchors come close to holding in all bottoms, but no anchor is best in all areas. Around here we have a lot of limestone rock covered in weeds. The best anchor for this by far is a Marsh stockless.
http://www.industrialsprings.com.au/catalog/images/os_stock.jpg

I'm sure no one outside of South Australia has heard of these, but this the most common anchor found on all serious boats in this area - for a good reason. In mud and soft sand they hold poorly, but nothing else hold as well on limestone. (and heavier is better; if you can lift it)

I have found great luck with both the60 Danforth and 60CQR ,

but if I could ONLY have a single anchor for a cruise , I think I would choose a Herrishoff fisherman of about 500lbs (50 ft boat).

FF said:

I have found great luck with both the60 Danforth and 60CQR ,

but if I could ONLY have a single anchor for a cruise , I think I would choose a Herrishoff fisherman of about 500lbs (50 ft boat).

Click to expand...

I assume you would need a hydraulic unit to lift it.

By the way, what type of anchor is a Herrishoff fisherman? (sorry, I don't venture into the anchor threads too often)

Andy,
The Herrishoff Fisherman is is only slightly different from a Kedge or Yachtsman's Anchor. It's major difference is it's greater fluke area. Every Herrishoff Kedge I've ever seen is beautifully made compared to the very economical Fisherman's anchor. I include some pics of the Herrishoff anchors so all can see the difference between the fisherman/kedge and the Herrishoff. Note that the fluke arm is straight in the area of the fluke and bent (curved) only near the shank. The Fisherman/Kedge has a fluke arm that is curved equally throughout it's length. See 1st pic. Also many Herrishoff anchors can be disassembled into three pieces.

AusCan,
Nope ... never seen one ... the Marsh anchor. It's like a Navy anchor to a great extent. That's a very heavy shank. Like my Dreadnought anchor. Actually very much like the Dreadnought. Here's a Dreadnought aboard an active fishing boat .. fisherman included. Same long and heavy shank and the flukes are similar too. Probably 20% of the fishing boats in Craig Alaska use this anchor. The guy in the pic says his Dreadnought holds in 50 knot summer gales but drags in 60 knot winter gales. The Dreadnought may date back to the first world war.

The trick to shipping a really heavy anchor is to do what was done before WWII when Danforth created his gem.

A bent piece of pipe , called a crane0 has a deck mount at the pointy end of the boat. It usually is foitted with a 4-1 or 6-1 tackle and a cleat.

When the windlass or capstan brings the anchor up to almost deck level a slakle is hooked to the eye of the anchor and the tackle is used to raise the anchor high enough to clear the rail.

It is then swung aboard and lowered into chocks and lashed down.

Just a bit of gear and tiny technique to use what today would be consider huge.

Still a 1 man job to get the anchor up and secured .

The old Rule of thumb (before Danforth) was 10 lb of anchor for each foot of boat.

The hassle with the Herrishoff anchors is the same as with the Northill , reversing current or winds can wrap the fluke standing proud and snag the anchor.

Another problem again with those anchors discussed above, especially the Dreadnought, is they are only as good as the holding provided by the size and depth penetration of their flukes. Once their shank is on the bottom, there is no chance for deeper penetration as there is with other types which continue to dive into the substrate, like Danforth, Fortress, Rocna, Sarca, Manson Supreme and of course those based on the Spade. I suspect this limitation is the limitation in certain conditions of the Bruce/Claw type also.

So…they has to be really heavy, and even then, they had a limit, as Eric's anecdote re one holding to 50kn winds, but letting go in 60kn, illustrates. The newer designs now make huge weight virtually redundant. Thank goodness..!

Peter that's standard w any anchor. none penetrate very far in most bottoms. The shank and the rode prevent most anchors from much penetration. The XYZs shank is streamlined and so small it does penetrate very well. Just more than others though.

The Dreadnought probably penetrates 3 or 4" depending on the bottom and the size of the anchor. Even the Navy anchor penetrates some. But the Dan & Navy don't penetrate much. The Navy acts like a bulldozer in my opinion. Dosn't rely on the material on top of the anchor but the material in front of the anchor. It creates it's own berm that presents resistance. They say there's burying anchors and non burying anchors but they all do get to some degree below the surface.

The Claw has small flukes but the shank is so high that it dosn't even touch the bottom until the flukes have penetrated 10 to 16" depending on the size of the anchor. Then the shank goes deeper more easily because the angle is more parallel to the bottom. And the vertical part of the Claw's shank just causes drag. It does not push up .. reducing penetration .. like on a Danforth or Dreadnought. There's another anchor that has a shank very very similar to the Claw. SARCA.

The Danforths and roll bar types have stocks and roll bars that limit penetration in that they don't aid the anchors penetration. They just cause drag. But your'e right Peter most of the newer anchors do penetrate better and hold better as a result. Some anchor experts say an anchor's holding power is directly proportional to fluke surface area. But 2 sq ft of fluke area 12" down is far superior to being only 3" down. In time better anchors will be built. And as always they won't be perfect.

Many years ago Danforth came out with an anchor called a Deepset. It looked a lot like a regular Danforth except everything was made as thin and sharp as possible. The shank was very thin but strong and springy steel.

They introduced the anchor at a trade show with a large aquarium full of sand. They had made tiny scale models of the Deepset and a High Test anchor.

You would drop the high test into the sand and pull it along the bottom until it was well set but with enough effort you could drag it through the sand.

If you did the same thing with the Deepset model, it would just keep digging deeper until you could not pull it. It was amazing. This was about a three inch anchor and grown men couldn't drag it through the sand.

They actually recommended putting several feet of cable between the anchor and the chain to make it easier for the shank to bury itself.

They had trouble producing it in larger sizes. The spring steel shanks always seemed to have a little curve to them and people wouldn't buy them.

I have a small one hanging on my pulpit as a back up anchor.

I'am moving a 47' Comcorde from the umr to the Detroit river, left 2 weeks ago last Monday. I planned to anchor out as often as possible, my concern was the small Danforth on the bow. We have anchored every night except the 3 nights spent in marinas and the genuine Danforth 10 lbs has set and held very well on the Mis & Illinois rivers and along the eastern shore of Lake Michigan and the one time so far on Huron. I have a FX-37 on my 18,500 lbs boat which I know is overkill but I sleep well. This Concorde is 40,000 lbs dry and I've gained much more confidence in the Danforth on the bow than when we started this trip, there is a FX-23 as a backup that I thought we may need especially in the current of the Illinois river, but never felt the need for it.

In the early XYZ days they offered the anchor w a 2 or 3' cable w eyes on the ends. When I bought my first XYZ they didn't send me one so I had one made up. I seldom use it and don't know if it ever did me any good.

In soft bottoms Claws are well known for burying so deep ther'e difficult to extract.

River Cruiser,
The Danforth anchor is the highest holding power anchor in the world. The Fortress has proven that on many anchor tests. I bought one awhile back that was made by a salvage co. It has a heavy shank and stock. It's heavy for my boat at 36lbs and have not tried it yet. But I've used my 13lb Danforth and it has always set and held up to 35 knot winds. It came w the boat. "Came with boat" is how most boaters get their anchors.

"Seeking Fortress FX-23 or FX-37 Anchor"

I just placed this heading in classified. I've two original, old-school Danforth anchors, 23 lb and a 30 lb. Neither does real well in the extra fluffy mud bottom of SF Delta. I've had both pull loose with not too much effort, with or without 15' of chain lead to line. All my life of boating in other bottom conditions Danforth has been my anchor of choice.

Sooo... In researching I located stats on the Fortress brand and feel its configuration may be the ticket for being sure to dig deeply into SF Delta's super soft mud. Fortress shank can be set at 45 degrees to the flukes for better downward digging into soft mud and it has Mud Palms on both sides to center top so the wings don't tend to settle into mud and ruin the 45 degree dig angle of its flukes.

We shall see!

Art said:

... Neither does real well in the extra fluffy mud bottom of SF Delta. I've had both pull loose with not too much effort, with or without 15' of chain lead to line. ...

Click to expand...

I perceive it as sticky/dense/heavy mud bottoms, leastwise in the western SF estuary, which a claw handles readily.

You'll love it Art. Bought an FX-16 from Hopkins Carter this year after trying to scrounge one off the classifieds. Best improvement to the boat yet. My 16 would be plenty for your Tolly as it's big for my Owens.

I thought someone had a 23 for sale here recently?

CPseudonym, Thanks for the plug!

Art said:

"Seeking Fortress FX-23 or FX-37 Anchor"

I just placed this heading in classified. I've two original, old-school Danforth anchors, 23 lb and a 30 lb. Neither does real well in the extra fluffy mud bottom of SF Delta. I've had both pull loose with not too much effort, with or without 15' of chain lead to line. All my life of boating in other bottom conditions Danforth has been my anchor of choice.

Sooo... In researching I located stats on the Fortress brand and feel its configuration may be the ticket for being sure to dig deeply into SF Delta's super soft mud. Fortress shank can be set at 45 degrees to the flukes for better downward digging into soft mud and it has Mud Palms on both sides to center top so the wings don't tend to settle into mud and ruin the 45 degree dig angle of its flukes.

We shall see!

Click to expand...

Art,

You will see a dramatic difference in holding power of the Fortress at the 45° angle in those soft mud bottoms. We conducted a series of tests in 1990 near Hunter's Point in the SF Bay and you can expect a 3-4x increase in holding power vs. the 32° angle.

We also recently completed 3 days of extensive testing in the soft mud of the Chesapeake Bay and found similar results.

Although we hold a US patent on the adjustable shank / fluke angle, using a wider angle to improve anchor performance in soft mud is no secret, as Vryhof (large offshore anchor manufacturer) and the US Navy have anchors with this feature.

Safe anchoring,
Brian