Dare I Say Another Anchor Article

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
8,056
Location
USA
Vessel Name
Alaskan Sea-Duction
Vessel Make
1988 M/Y Camargue YachtFisher
From Active Cap't::popcorn::hello:

>>> Which Anchor is Best >>>

There. It's in writing. Yes, we're going to "tackle" the subject. And while you'll never see a newsletter segment about politics or religion from ActiveCaptain, anchors are fair game.

Many of you won't agree with us. You don't have to write us to tell us.
We know. If 400 responded to the ActiveCaptain Services segment from a couple of weeks ago, we can't imagine how many would respond to this!
Please don't expect any replies. But we also feel that just because a subject is controversial doesn't mean we can't give our experiences.
We're told all the time that this is desired. So here it is.

This segment was precipitated by Defender telling us only last week that they were going to run this week's special on the Rocna anchor. They didn't ask us to write this segment and they don't know we're doing it.
The thoughts are our own based on our first-hand use.

We love anchoring. It's one of the best things about cruising. It allows access to remote areas and makes us feel like we're really getting away.
When we dropped the anchor in Bay Springs Lake, MS (yes, Mississippi) with the plan to stay a night or two, it was being at anchor in the incredible setting that made us stay (9 nights). We have similar stories at Cape Lookout, Cumberland Island, the Bahamas, and many other places.

We love anchors. When we first started long-distance cruising, we ran with 4 anchors (really) - a Bruce, a CQR, a Fortress FX, and a Danforth.
Maine mud loves the Bruce and it was our main anchor. Our boat is rather large at nearly 80,000 lbs, 53 feet LOA, 16 foot beam, 6 foot draft. We use all chain rode and put out more scope than less. We try to anchor in places where we can put out 7:1 scope. We use 10:1 or more for storms.
When we're in a crowded place, we put out 7:1, set it hard in reverse, and then pull back chain to better fit in harmony with others. We ALWAYS power set the anchor in reverse, allowing the engines to sit for as long as a minute at faster-than-idle reverse speeds using DragQueen to monitor any type of dragging.

The first bad dragging experience we had was in the Bahamas in 2004. The wind whipped up to 25 knots with a wind change, the boat swung, and the Bruce popped out. It happened at 3 am in total darkness. The wind woke us and the electronics all worked perfectly, letting us know that we were moving. It was pretty scary because we couldn't get the anchor to reset. We slowly motored along our incoming track until daylight when we switched our anchor to the Fortress, and dropped it with a good set.

From that moment on, we only used the Bruce north of Charleston, and the Fortress when we were to the south. The CQR did a terrible job of holding our boat in any condition and the Danforth was a poor version of the Fortress (which we loved).

Through the mid-2000's we were in search of a better anchor. We often had to set the Bruce or Fortress multiple times to get it power set to make us comfortable. We hated switching anchors in Charleston. And there was a new generation of anchors emerging - Delta, Spade, Bugel, and Rocna. The analysis was on and we took 3 years to decide.

Looking back, we were a fairly early adopter of the Rocna and bought ours in 2009. We sold the CQR and gave away the Danforth. The Rocna became our main anchor and the Fortress remained as our backup. From the moment we dropped the Rocna from our bow for the first time in Carver's Cove in Vinalhaven, ME, we knew this was a different type of anchor. It stuck immediately. Power setting wouldn't move us back 10-30 feet. The best electronics in the world couldn't detect any movement. It just stuck.

Everyone who has a Rocna knows this exact experience. It doesn't matter why it works or how it works. It just works.

There was an unfortunate incidence with Rocna metal switching in the 2010 timeframe. Much of this was overblown in our opinion. No matter what, it's been resolved today.

There are also some knock-offs today. The Manson Supreme is a good example of an obvious copy. We have friends with Mansons who are quite happy with them.

So there you have it. You might find a dozen ways to disagree with us.
But it's our truth. The incredible thing is that Defender has the Rocna for this one week at lower prices than 2009 when we purchased ours.
Actually, they're lower than we've ever seen, anywhere. If you have a CQR or Danforth, this is your moment. Don't let it pass.

And ALWAYS power set your anchor. We might be behind you!
 
Jeff uses the same setup we have. Primary anchor is a Rocna purchased in 2007 (or 6, I can't remember) and a Fortress. The performance of the Rocna has been stirling. The Fortress is also a very cool anchor; we use it primarily as a stern anchor and it's perfect for that. Lightweight, easy to carry out in the dinghy and deploy, and we can easily carry it and its rode forward to use off the bow if we choose to. Regardless of what one chooses for their primary anchor i strongly recommend that one includes a suitably sized Fortress as well.
 
Last edited:
Ditto. Got a Roccna and anchoring issues are rare and usually due to operator error or really poor substrate (see operator error).

Jim
Sent from my iPad using Trawler Forum
 
When I saw the message from Active Captain this morning, I could hardly believe it. Jeff is a member here and has seen what happens. Never ending....inconclusive....impossible to level the playing field (bottom). Even if you found a field of perfectly leveled, perfectly consistent field of bay bottom to use, it would still be only one kind of bottom.

If one anchor wins, there will be droves of protesters yelling "FIX!

Why can't we just say Rockna is the best and leave it at that?:hide:

Anyway, Vegas will be making book on this one.
 
If you are upwind of me please use a Rocna or a Manson Supreme. If you are downwind, I don't care what you use.
 
Jeff has strong opinions, and is not bashful about sharing them.
 
I love my Rocna, and chain.
 
I love my Rocna, but I don't really know my chain that well yet. These things take time.

?

And I will now do my plug for Parks Masterson, the owner at Hopkins Carter Marine. That's where I bought my lovely Rocna, and Parks even delivered it. Same prices (or better) than the big mega stores like West Marine et al, and way better service.

http://www.hopkins-carter.com
 
Last edited:
I love my chain

(Sorry chain, I was blinded by the bling at the end of you. Will you forgive me?)
 
I love my chain

(Sorry chain, I was blinded by the bling at the end of you. Will you forgive me?)

Yeah, but what about your shackles, Bill......do you love your shackles? And one might ask if one should love anything. Mason loved his new boat shoes and look what happened to him.
 
I don't love my existing shackle. It's crap.

I will love my new shackle when it's installed.
 
I love my Rocna. I really like my chain. I'm just OK with my several hundred feet of SS cable - I really wish I were all chain but 450' of chain on the drum of my on-deck hydraulic windlass would be a PITA.
 
You have 450' of cable? Damn. That sounds like a lot.
 
You should. Chain does 90% of the work usually at anchor.

You think so eh?

Try and anchor w 80% of your rode in chain and 20% anchor.
Then try it w 80% anchor and 20% chain.

Compared to the anchor chain does squat. It helps a lot setting the anchor but if your anchor sets promptly and fully who needs it?

Chapman hardly recommends any chain at all. "Six to eight feet" is mentioned in the 63rd edition of Chapman's Piloting. Even I use a bit more than that. Mostly for chafing protection and nylon line cleanliness.
 
You think so eh?

Try and anchor w 80% of your rode in chain and 20% anchor.
Then try it w 80% anchor and 20% chain.

Compared to the anchor chain does squat. It helps a lot setting the anchor but if your anchor sets promptly and fully who needs it?

Chapman hardly recommends any chain at all. "Six to eight feet" is mentioned in the 63rd edition of Chapman's Piloting. Even I use a bit more than that. Mostly for chafing protection and nylon line cleanliness.
I know so.

Ships do it on a larger scale every day, I've dove my anchor (and rode) and have seen how it acts in low to moderate winds (what we encounter 90% of the time) . The catenary does the work.
 
Last edited:
I know so.

Ships do it on a larger scale every day, I've dove my anchor (and rode) and have seen how it acts in low to moderate winds (what we encounter 90% of the time) . The catenary does the work.

Agree ....in most conditions I like anchoring in....the last 10 feet of chain probably never comes off the bottom.

Granted when conditions increase....the role reverses and like most here.... want a great anchor at the end to do the job.

It takes some pretty interesting conditions to produce a steady state pull where the snubber is doing all the stretching after lifting all the chain and stretching it tight.

I try and avoid those kind of conditions.
 
Are you guys saying that no load is on the anchor until all the catenary is out of the rode? That doesn't sound right. The catenary keeps the pull more horizontal but the load is still on the anchor.
 
Sigh. There are two different methods of anchoring. Drag enbedment and tension anchoring.

Theoretically, a drag enbedment anchor merely holds the end of a centenary chain. Long enough chain, no anchor required.

A tension anchor requires the use of a well placed anchor with a cable or rope rode.

They use entirely different physics.

Eric, the short scope ratio anchors you prefer use tension. The rest of the big boats with bohunking metric f-tons of chain can get away with a chain catenary and an anchor at the end.

I have pulled up ships moorings that have no anchor, just a lot of chain which provides a lot of drag in the mud.

Indeed, I know of a sub that anchored successfully with chain only, as the anchor was cut off, as it was banging on the ballast tanks like a gong.

Eric, please look this up. Your arguments have merit, but only when your comparisons are the same.
 
If you are upwind of me please use a Rocna or a Manson Supreme. If you are downwind, I don't care what you use.

Yes…but don't forget, in tidal areas, downwind often later becomes upwind.
:D
 
So here's a question...... Why does this work (photo)?

Everybody here talks about how one needs a big anchor, bigger is better, right?. Eric believes that if we'd had a 44# Bruce instead of the manufacturer-recommended 33# we wouldn't have had the dragging problems we had. I find it hard to believe that 9 pounds is going to make any difference to the anchor's ability to stay put when pulled on real hard but who knows? People believe an all-chain rode isn't necessary or is even bad.

So why do all these arguments fall totally apart in the situation illustrated below? Compared to the size of the vessel, the anchors on this thing are not just small, they're miniscule, a joke. Same with the chain. Sure, they're massive and heavy when you walk up to them. But compared to the size of the vessel the anchor's a bent paper clip and the chain is a piece of string.

If we scaled this ship's anchor and chain up so it was the same ratio to the vessel's size as the anchor and chain on, say, our boat, the anchor would be damn near the size of a 737. Well, not quite but you get the idea.

So why do the ridiculously tiny anchor and chain on this vessel work?

I'm not trying to win an argument or defend a point. I genuinely don't know, particularly if the same rules apply to all vessels across the board.
 

Attachments

  • Tanker.jpg
    Tanker.jpg
    88.3 KB · Views: 82
Good question Marin, and one I've often thought about, and even quoted as a case that proves the added benefit of the all chain rode, basically. I think the key is that the links in the chain on these boats weigh about a ton, (give or take, depending on the vessel size), and the anchor just sort of grabs the seafloor enough to locate the end of the chain I think. Sure, the anchor will dig in as well, but I suspect it is the huge catenary which does the real holding, and to me this is a good example of that principle in action.
 
...
If we scaled this ship's anchor and chain up so it was the same ratio to the vessel's size as the anchor and chain on, say, our boat, the anchor would be damn near the size of a 737. Well, not quite but you get the idea.

So why do the ridiculously tiny anchor and chain on this vessel work?

...

But is that actually true? Let's run some numbers.

Here's a short article on anchor chain on the Triple E class freighter from Maersk

Anchor chain for the world’s largest ship is so big it makes humans look like mini figurines | 22 Words

It says that the links on the anchor chain weigh over 500 lbs each. Now the links on my anchor chain weigh 0.25 lbs each (8 links to the foot, 2lbs per foot). That makes the chain on the container ship 2000 times heavier than my boat.

The Triple E class container ship runs 55,000 tonnes displacement empty (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maersk_Triple_E_class) My boat is 31 tonnes dry, making the Triple E about 1800 times heavier than my boat.

It seems to me that the anchor chain, at least, appears to be roughly in scale to the size of the boat/ship.

I haven't found the weight of the anchors for these behemoths yet.

Richard
 
Funny how he omiits the SARCA from even being discussed or tested
 
Back
Top Bottom