Positive Anchor Drag Detector System

FlyWright said:

We saw the same thing in the airplane cockpit. Those reliant on digital displays and autopilots lost the seat of the pants/look outside feel. Like you, I'm old school. Learn the basics first then add the electronics and automation.

Click to expand...

Old school here as well. Did the BC coast with charts in a big ziplock bag, a deck mounted compass on the kayak, and a wrist watch. About as 'seat of the pants' navigation as it gets.

FlyWright said:

We saw the same thing in the airplane cockpit. Those reliant on digital displays and autopilots lost the seat of the pants/look outside feel. Like you, I'm old school. Learn the basics first then add the electronics and automation.

Click to expand...

I was fortunate (or unfortunate depending on viewpoint) that I started boating at a young age when there were no electronics except VHF. And my sailboat had no battery for a radio. We learned, experimented and used our brain and senses to get around by boat.

I boated for over 20 years until the first digital depthsounder was introduced and lower cost Loran C receivers became available. 25 years for the affordable CRT radars and 30 years before PC charting and GPS revolutionized navigation electronics.

I think about those simple early days and am thankful that modern equipment has made boating much safer and enjoyable.

How in heck did I survive in those days with no inverter, electric blanket, Keurig, electric toothbrush, stereo etc?

To those interested the device does not rely on GPS as it is detecting movement at the anchor and transmitting the signal back to the boat via electronics in the float. It can work with and without cell cover. This system is not a simple as it sounds and I have been playing around with different ideas for a number of years. That said what we have come up with is rather simplistic and robust.
I agree with everything everyone is saying about experience and training but for a couple hundred Canadian let’s call it belt and braces. Not a lot of money to spend on safety and peace of mind.

I'll buy one and be the TF Guinea Pig. Ominously, I've seen (Peru) the Guinea Pig ovens where the little critters are roasted and then eaten like hot dogs.

Maybe I'll pass it along to Eric who can attach to his trial anchors. This will be fun and provide some real world data.

You seat of the pants guys that say not to have the technology are TOTALLY ASS BACKWARD and a dangerous way of thinking.

To make statements the following show a lack of understanding and are boardering on just stupid:
Dont have a autopilot so you'll learn how to manually operate the boat.....
Don't have radar so I'll never boat in the fog....
Don't have a second engine so you'll never learn how to deal with a total power loss.....
Don't have a depth finder ..... dont have a GPS.... technology is bad
And on and on.


This line of thinking is even worse in an airplane!

Get ALL the safety and convenience devices you want, and USE them, and benefit from them. That's the way your BOAT, normally.

And during training, we train for when the above fails. We train to develop the skills so we can operate the boat under different conditions, with and without failures. That's the way you TRAIN.

To say the you shouldn't buy technology because it will make you lazy or untrained is akin to saying don't buy a car so you won't forget how to walk.

rtheriault said:

I have designed the deployment mechanism which is simple and foolproof.

Click to expand...

rtheriault said:

To those interested the device does not rely on GPS as it is detecting movement at the anchor and transmitting the signal back to the boat via electronics in the float.

Click to expand...

Are you saying the device will "deploy" with the anchor? Go overboard, underwater?

-Chris

Seevee said:

To say the you shouldn't buy technology because it will make you lazy or untrained is akin to saying don't buy a car so you won't forget how to walk.

Click to expand...

I'll have you know we have best of 1980's technology on our boat

On a long trip I organize the charts in order, then leaf through them as we move from one charted area to another. If the iPad dies taking Navionics with it I'll just shrug, pull out the relevant chart, and keep going on our merry way

Would it have a dedicated receiver, something like a Spot Messenger device?

rtheriault said:

To those interested the device does not rely on GPS as it is detecting movement at the anchor and transmitting the signal back to the boat via electronics in the float. ....

Click to expand...

THat makes a lot of sense. anchor drift, not boat drift.
But, make sure you have either frequency hopping or some other method of multi-user discrimination when this thing takes off. Both on the ultrasonic link and the rf link. Sounds like two batteries to deal with too.

If this ends up working well enough, it'll be a useful thing to have on the market. But IMO, it'll fall into the same category as radar, autopilot and some others where for some people it makes sense, while others just don't have enough need for it to justify the cost.

Seevee said:

You seat of the pants guys that say not to have the technology are TOTALLY ASS BACKWARD and a dangerous way of thinking.

To make statements the following show a lack of understanding and are boardering on just stupid:
Dont have a autopilot so you'll learn how to manually operate the boat.....
Don't have radar so I'll never boat in the fog....
Don't have a second engine so you'll never learn how to deal with a total power loss.....
Don't have a depth finder ..... dont have a GPS.... technology is bad
And on and on.


This line of thinking is even worse in an airplane!

Get ALL the safety and convenience devices you want, and USE them, and benefit from them. That's the way your BOAT, normally.

And during training, we train for when the above fails. We train to develop the skills so we can operate the boat under different conditions, with and without failures. That's the way you TRAIN.

To say the you shouldn't buy technology because it will make you lazy or untrained is akin to saying don't buy a car so you won't forget how to walk.

Click to expand...

I think you misunderstand the previous comments a bit. I wasn't saying automation is bad or not helpful. I stated that it's best to learn how to do it right without all the automation and digital backup then use those components to aid in the execution after the basic skills are learned. For example, some only know how to navigate with a chartplotter and are lost without it. Learn how to navigate with paper charts first (and carry them aboard) so you'll have something to fall back on when the chartplotter takes a nap at the wrong time.

Seevee said:

You seat of the pants guys that say not to have the technology are TOTALLY ASS BACKWARD and a dangerous way of thinking.

To make statements the following show a lack of understanding and are boardering on just stupid:
Dont have a autopilot so you'll learn how to manually operate the boat.....
Don't have radar so I'll never boat in the fog....
Don't have a second engine so you'll never learn how to deal with a total power loss.....
Don't have a depth finder ..... dont have a GPS.... technology is bad
And on and on.


This line of thinking is even worse in an airplane!

Get ALL the safety and convenience devices you want, and USE them, and benefit from them. That's the way your BOAT, normally.

And during training, we train for when the above fails. We train to develop the skills so we can operate the boat under different conditions, with and without failures. That's the way you TRAIN.

To say the you shouldn't buy technology because it will make you lazy or untrained is akin to saying don't buy a car so you won't forget how to walk.

Click to expand...

I just love people on the web that call others derogatory names and use CAPITOL letters to make their angry point.

They must not read whole posts or have difficulty comprehending.

And are'nt forums a place to share and exchange ideas?

I never said not to embrace technology.

I said novice boaters need to learn the basics first before using technology.

And don't people learning to fly get trained in simple small planes with minimal instrumentation before advancing to more sophisticated planes?

Jeez, get a life!

I like the idea, but to me there are a few aspects of it that are non-starters.

First is the float. I know some people deploy a float at the anchor, but I have no interest in having to deal with a line in addition to my ride. Where is it stowed? How does it attach to the anchor? How does it pay out with entanglement? How is it recovered without entanglement? How does it work over a wide range of anchor depth. I’ve anchored in 8’ and in 120’. That’s a lot a variation. This aspect alone seems like a nightmare, and way more trouble than the value delivered by more precise anchor alarming.

The second is the use of cellular. I may be an outlier, probably am, but I spend plenty of time where there is no cell service. For me, and device that requires cellular or internet access to work has no place on the boat. It’s just not acceptable for some important piece of equipment to not work, or stop working because there is no cellular or internet access. I understand that many people live a life where there is always internet, but not me. I’d say 50% of my life is in areas where there is no cellular service. Plus I have zero interest in yet another subscription or service plan.

So I would never look past the brochure, but that’s me. It would be interesting to hear whether this is an issue for others.

Yes the device deploys underwater with the anchor. It doesn’t use ultrasonic or any underwater radio technology as it just doesn’t work. The US navy is working on it!

Twistedtree this the kind of feedback i am looking for. Not whether people need a new gadget or not. The issues you bring up are valid and we have delt with buoy deployment and lack of cell cover in our design.

Like others, I use Anchor Watch and other systems when I'm on the boat, but this sounds like it would notify you when you're away. I like to take off in the tender and explore other nearby islands and bays, along with hiking for hours. It's always a slight relief to return and see the boat right where I left it. Something that would alert me (via cell or whatever) if we are dragging would be of interest. I've been boating 30+ years in the NW and have dragged anchor twice, once aboard, and once not. I consider myself fairly competent at setting the hook, but would definitely consider this product.

rtheriault said:

Yes the device deploys underwater with the anchor. It doesn’t use ultrasonic or any underwater radio technology as it just doesn’t work. The US navy is working on it!

Click to expand...

Hmmm...

I'd guess that would add some complication to the whole anchor launch/recovery process...

Might be useful, but can't yet see that it would be ENOUGH MORE useful than the several anchor watch systems we already have: two installed GPS-based systems, one GPS-based laptop application, two GPS-based tablet (or smartphone) apps, essentially all paid for.

Good luck with it, though. I'd suspect some will find it more useful than we might...

-Chris

Max Simmons said:

Like others, I use Anchor Watch and other systems when I'm on the boat, but this sounds like it would notify you when you're away. I like to take off in the tender and explore other nearby islands and bays, along with hiking for hours. It's always a slight relief to return and see the boat right where I left it. Something that would alert me (via cell or whatever) if we are dragging would be of interest. I've been boating 30+ years in the NW and have dragged anchor twice, once aboard, and once not. I consider myself fairly competent at setting the hook, but would definitely consider this product.

Click to expand...

You nailed it Max. Exactly what we’re hoping to achieve.

twistedtree said:

I like the idea, but to me there are a few aspects of it that are non-starters.

First is the float. I know some people deploy a float at the anchor, but I have no interest in having to deal with a line in addition to my ride. Where is it stowed? How does it attach to the anchor? How does it pay out with entanglement? How is it recovered without entanglement? How does it work over a wide range of anchor depth. I’ve anchored in 8’ and in 120’. That’s a lot a variation. This aspect alone seems like a nightmare, and way more trouble than the value delivered by more precise anchor alarming.

...

Click to expand...

Last year I watched two boats become entangled when boat A got boat B's anchor float (and presumably the rode) caught up in his prop in a crowded anchorage. Ultimately, boat A had to be towed away by TowBoatUS with a fouled prop and Boat B had to go home due to a lost anchor.

I'll never use a float above my anchor for this reason alone.

rtheriault said:

To those interested the device does not rely on GPS as it is detecting movement at the anchor and transmitting the signal back to the boat via electronics in the float. It can work with and without cell cover. This system is not a simple as it sounds and I have been playing around with different ideas for a number of years. That said what we have come up with is rather simplistic and robust.
I agree with everything everyone is saying about experience and training but for a couple hundred Canadian let’s call it belt and braces. Not a lot of money to spend on safety and peace of mind.

Click to expand...

I purchased something similar years ago. The accelerometer was attached to the anchor chain and sent a 20 khz (?) signal to a receiver that had to be mounted under water to the bow of the boat. The device chirped every 20 seconds or so (as I recall) to assure that there was communication (occasionally, the boat would drift in such a way that the signal could not be received). If the accelerometer detected significant movement (sensitivity was adjustable), an alarm would sound on the boat.

It wasn't fool proof, but it was pretty good. The biggest problem was keeping the batteries charged. After the novelty wore off, it was more trouble than it was worth to use.

MYTraveler said:

After the novelty wore off, it was more trouble than it was worth to use.

Click to expand...

I think this will be key to your new product success.

In the words of many people evaluating the hundreds of product ideas I have tried to start, "......It sounds like a solution looking for a problem."

Just because you come up with a clever way to accomplish a problem, doesn't necessariy mean there is a business case for it. This has been a really tough pill for me to swallow over the last 20 years, but one that has certainly saved me lots of money.....

JMHO,

Thanks for the useful discussion. Sure, for every solution there is a problem but i will persevere.

MYTraveler said:

I purchased something similar years ago. The accelerometer was attached to the anchor chain and sent a 20 khz (?) signal to a receiver that had to be mounted under water to the bow of the boat. The device chirped every 20 seconds or so (as I recall) to assure that there was communication (occasionally, the boat would drift in such a way that the signal could not be received). If the accelerometer detected significant movement (sensitivity was adjustable), an alarm would sound on the boat.

It wasn't fool proof, but it was pretty good. The biggest problem was keeping the batteries charged. After the novelty wore off, it was more trouble than it was worth to use.

Click to expand...

MYTraveler i would be interested in any information you have on the similar system you purchased a few years ago. I haven’t been able to find anything that comes close.

Who cares if they drag if it can’t be detected by on’s senses?

Nomad Willy said:

Who cares if they drag if it can’t be detected by on’s senses?

Click to expand...

Ah, if a boat drags in a deserted anchorage with nobody to see it, did it really drag? We can add that to the list of deep philosophic questions.

twistedtree said:

Ah, if a boat drags in a deserted anchorage with nobody to see it, did it really drag? We can add that to the list of deep philosophic questions.

Click to expand...

Or maybe shallow philosophic questions, if skinny water matters.

-Chris

boathealer said:

I think this will be key to your new product success.

In the words of many people evaluating the hundreds of product ideas I have tried to start, "......It sounds like a solution looking for a problem."

Just because you come up with a clever way to accomplish a problem, doesn't necessariy mean there is a business case for it. This has been a really tough pill for me to swallow over the last 20 years, but one that has certainly saved me lots of money.....

JMHO,

Click to expand...

I too have found this to be key in defining new products, and the difference between those that take off, and those that don't.


There is huge inertia in people's habits. We see it all the time here on TF. When we have a system or technique worked out that works for us, we stick with it, defend it, recommend it, and resist alternate approaches. It's human nature.


As a result, something that is new and better can rarely unseat something that is working and entrenched. To unseat the status quo, you need something that is really substantially better. Or better yet, you need something that enables people to do something they couldn't do before. The first anchor watch devices enabled something new and useful, so we all have them. But we aren't likely to change for something that's just a little bit better when what we are doing works.


One person's eyes lit up over the idea of remote notification of a drag. That's a useful new feature, and is the sort of thing that will get people to switch to a new anchor alarm. But keep in mind that it exists already in a number of products. And the incremental value is in remote alarming, not the anchor watch itself.

ranger42c said:

Or maybe shallow philosophic questions, if skinny water matters.

-Chris

Click to expand...

Groaner....That's a good one.

twistedtree said:

One person's eyes lit up over the idea of remote notification of a drag. That's a useful new feature, and is the sort of thing that will get people to switch to a new anchor alarm. But keep in mind that it exists already in a number of products. And the incremental value is in remote alarming, not the anchor watch itself.

Click to expand...

I think one of our tablet/phone apps will send notifications. Initiate the anchor watch on one cell phone and leave it on board, that can transmit to another cell phone if necessary. Something like that. Haven't ever tried it...

-Chris

rtheriault said:

MYTraveler i would be interested in any information you have on the similar system you purchased a few years ago. I haven’t been able to find anything that comes close.

Click to expand...

I may still have the anchor portion in my garage, but the receiver end of it went with the last boat when I sold it. I ended up talking with the guy who invented and marketed it. One of the challenges was where to attach the sensor to the anchor chain. Too close to the anchor and the sensor can get buried (at which point its signal is blocked), while too far from the anchor causes the sensor to respond to movement in the anchor chain, as opposed to the anchor. Putting the sensor on the anchor and the transmitter further up the chain wasn't much of an improvement (in part because the transmiter, which sends a cone-shaped sound pulse, much like a fishfinder transducer, needs to point toward the boat).

A better way to do it, IMO, would have been to run a signal cable up the anchor chain (easy for all-chain rode, more difficult if even possible with rope -- a windlass would quickly destroy any exposed portion of the cable) . Initial installation would be a PITA, but after that the whole deal becomes very user-friendly and reliable. Probably a lot of people would be put-off by the float idea -- I know I would be. You might consider that as an alternative to the float idea.

As for investor funding, you might look into Kickstarter. Not only will you get some of the capital you need, you will also get an indication of user interest/ buyer demand.