anchoring thoughts and motoring to take up the strainRE: [Rhodes22-list] anchoring obsession

Michel Meltzer mjm at michaelmeltzer.com
Sat Jan 14 16:38:55 EST 2006


I am not sure it in the mailyet, click on the link "get web access now",
ir free to the subscribers -mjm

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org [mailto:rhodes22-list-
> bounces at rhodes22.org] On Behalf Of Bill Effros
> Sent: Saturday, January 14, 2006 4:32 PM
> To: The Rhodes 22 mail list
> Subject: Re: anchoring thoughts and motoring to take up the strainRE:
> [Rhodes22-list] anchoring obsession
> 
> Mary Lou,
> 
> Thanks for providing more grist for the mill.  I don't understand how
to
> test the load on an anchor.  Do you?  Did Fortress explain this at
all?
> I assume it's done by putting a big "fish scale" between 2 parts of
the
> rode.  I haven't seen the PS anchor story yet, but I did see the
picture
> of the winch on the dock.  They must have a "fish scale" somewhere in
> that rig to measure the load.
> 
> If they are testing anchors with winches, again, they have, again,
> entirely missed the point of anchoring.  The winch is the brick and
the
> anchor is the kite.  This has everything to do with coming up with big
> numbers, and nothing to do with anchoring--it does not tell you the
> loads put on an anchor when anchoring--only the loads generated by a
big
> winch.
> 
> This type of test favors a plow type anchor because these anchors set
by
> being pulled into the bottom like a plow designed to get stuck.  This
> type of test also makes catenary curve discussions meaningless,
because
> the winch pulls the curve entirely out of the rode.
> 
> PS didn't come today.  I didn't see anyone able to load it on the
list.
> I'll be damned if I pay them to see something I've already bought.
> 
> Bill Effros
> 
> 
> 
> Mary Lou Troy wrote:
> 
> > Michael and all,
> > We've never actually used the motor to take up the strain in a storm
> > anchoring situation but have had the motor fired up and ready to
shift
> > into gear. Windage in our boats is substantial, especially at night
in
> > cruising configuration (pop-top cover & bimini up). A couple of
years
> > ago we were anchored in Swan Creek (with our old set up, a 9 lb
> > Danforth and 16 feet of chain, 7:1 scope) when a thundersquall
> > approached. The WX radio was calling for "possible" gusts in excess
of
> > 40 knots. Swan Creek is iffy holding ground - it's good mud but
> > there's a lot of junk on the bottom. We seemedl dug in but there was
a
> > three boat raft-up not too far away and many other boats behind us.
> > As the wind picked up we decided to start the motor just in case we
> > needed maneuverability if the raft-up started dragging or to take
some
> > of the strain off of our rode if we started dragging. As it turned
out
> > I don't think the winds got over 35 knots and we and the raftup held
> > so we just put about 40 minutes of running time in the motor until
the
> > storm blew out. It was pretty wild for the duration. We were
swinging
> > at anchor quite a bit though not as far as we do on quieter evenings
> > and the raftup really moved around as the wind shifted as the storm
> > passed through. One of the things we think about when anchoring is:
> > will there be enough room if boats swing differently? We got a good
> > demonstration that night of boats swinging differently in the same
> > wind conditions. A couple of boats behind us dragged and reanchored
> > successfully - at least they were in different places the next
morning
> > so I assume that's what happened. When we pulled anchor in the
morning
> > we had a lot of mud on one fluke and not much on the other. We might
> > have only ever had one fluke dug in or we might have been rocking
back
> > and forth as we swung, I don't know but I suspect that it just dug
in
> > on the angle and the strain from the wind just dug that side in
> > further. The chain, except for the last foot or so was cleaner than
> > usual so I'm sure it was off the bottom for at least part of the
time.
> > The last foot or so was very muddy and may have helped the Danforth
> > stay put.
> >
> > At Annapolis boatshow lastOctober we found a very good deal on a
> > Fortress FX-11 and started experimenting with a new configuration.
The
> > 9 lb Danforth had served us well, especially after we added another
10
> > feet of chain but the weight of the chain made it harder to move the
> > bag of anchor and chain around on deck and harder to retrieve.
> > Fortress recommends 6 ft for 25 ft. of water or less so that's what
we
> > are trying figuring we might as well start with the lightest and see
> > how it does. The whole set up has more theoretical holding power and
> > is much lighter than the Danforth. We only had one chance to try it
in
> > the fall. I was able to get a good set on the second try. One of the
> > reasons I have been reluctant to more away from the slightly
> > undersized Danforth (it had been the "storm" anchor on our Com-Pac
16)
> > was that I really knew how to set it and knew when it was well set.
> > Now I'm starting over with the Fortress. We're keeping the Danforth
as
> > an easily reachable second anchor because I know how to set it.
> >
> > BTW, according to a table in the Fortress literature we can only put
a
> > load of 160 lbs on our anchor setting it with an 8 hp motor. That
was
> > determined by pulling against a bollard so I suspect it's even less
> > with our Honda outboard in reverse.
> >
> > In any event anchoring is as much art as it is science. In a blow,
you
> > want to have the science as the basis for what you are doing but if
> > you couldn't get your anchor to set properly or the holding ground
is
> > poor the science may not be as much of a factor. Every weekend we
> > watch people (hopefully with anchors new to them or in charter
boats)
> > plowing up the anchorages, backing all over the place. We've watched
> > people try over and over again to set an anchor and finally motor
off
> > to some other place or maybe a marina without ever having set the
> > anchor. Or other folks motor to a stop, drop anchor and never put a
> > tug on the rode to see if it's set. We watch those boats very
> > carefully if they are anywhere near us. Often conditions are so
benign
> > it doesn't matter but we watch them anyway.
> >
> > Our anchoring experiences have been good but limited to Chesapeake
> > mud. We've spent a lot of nights on the hook and learned a lot from
> > watching others and from anchoring ourselves. It does take practice.
> > It's the only way you learn. The only time I'm sure we dragged was
> > where we were the anchor boat in a 5 R22 raftup in Swan Creek. In
> > retrospect we should have had the Kaynor's Raven as the anchor boat
-
> > their anchor was bigger but it was a calm afternoon when we anchored
-
> > the wind picked up at the tail end of happy hour so no harm done.
The
> > only time we've been dragged down on was very scary when a large
power
> > boat dragged into our Com-Pac 16 when we were on a mooring. He got
his
> > motor started and got off of us before any damage was done. In
> > retrospect I probably should have been on the bow ready to cut the
> > line so we could get out of his way if necessary.
> >
> > I've read all of Bill's arguments before and I must say that his
> > observations on LIS (?, i think?) are very different from ours on
the
> > Chesapeake but I've thought about them as I've analyzed various
> > anchoring situations and maybe they shed some new light on a
situation
> > or two. Some of that thinking may have influenced our decision to
try
> > a lighter weight set-up. If we ever take the boat somewhere where we
> > will be anchoring in sand (though there are sandy bottoms on the
> > Chesapeake) and rock we'll re-think our anchors and chain again.
> >
> > My nickels worth. BTW, the attached picture is of the 5 R22s in Swan
> > Creek BEFORE the raft broke up.
> >
> > Mary Lou
> > 1991 R22  Fretless
> > Ft. Washington, PA / Swan Creek, MD
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 01:41 AM 1/14/2006 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >> The problem, how much time do you have to do the "prep" work???
> >>
> >> Never hurts, but could your time be spent getting off the lee
shore,
> >> using land to mask the storm, heading for deeper water?
> >>
> >> BTW you can use the motor to take some of the force off the anchor,
but
> >> take it easy you do not want to run over the rode and loose both
the
> >> anchor and motor. -mjm
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: rhodes22-list-bounces at rhodes22.org [mailto:rhodes22-list-
> >> > bounces at rhodes22.org] On Behalf Of Peter Thorn
> >> > Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 4:29 PM
> >> > To: Rhodes 22 List Members
> >> > Subject: [Rhodes22-list] anchoring obsession
> >> >
> >> > GlacierRon, Dave, Bill or anybody:
> >> >
> >> > You have me thinking about anchors and not getting any work done
:)
> >> >
> >> > Suppose I'm out in the Pamlico Sound, with it's mucky bottom in
20'
> of
> >> > water
> >> > and a squall comes up.  Would it help to use the lunch hook, a
10#
> >> steel
> >> > mushroom anchor with a 3/8" nylon rode, as a Kellet  shackled to
the
> >> storm
> >> > anchor rode?   The storm anchor is FX11 Fortress with 16' of 1/4"
> >> proof
> >> > coil
> >> > chain plus 3/8" three strand nylon rode?  Or, could it just make
> >> things
> >> > worse?
> >> >
> >> > Any thoughts welcome.
> >> >
> >> > PT
> >>
> >>
> >> __________________________________________________
> >> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >
> >Name: raftup5.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 92562 bytes Desc: not
available
> >Url: http://www.rhodes22.org/pipermail/rhodes22-
> list/attch/200601/14/raftup5.jpg
> >
> >
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
> >
> >__________________________________________________
> >Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
> >
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list



More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list