chain wrapping around anchor

[djanis]

Originally Posted by Shrew

The problem with either a bow and a stern or a bahama moor set-up is you either need to be in the edge of the anchorage, or everyone has be doing it as well.

Setting either two-anchor system in the middle of an anchorage where everyone else is using a single bow anchor, is like parking sideways across the spaces of a parking lot.

Yes, a very good visual! And the other people will be pissed off.

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by djanis

Yes, a very good visual! And the other people will be pissed off.

Unless he's there first.

[Shrew]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

Unless he's there first.

Whether he's there first or not........people will be pissed off if they're in the middle of the anchorage.

When we come into an anchorage and see that, the first thing we say is "Look at this @#@$% @$$h0l3". We work around them and then spend the next few days laughing about them.

If the area dictates the method and/or is a common practice, that is one thing. The locations where we anchor it is not necessary. The considerate folks that do use two anchors do so close to shore or along the outskirts of the anchorage.

[roverhi]

Backing down to bury the anchor is the key to not fouling the anchor on tidal or wind caused change direction of pull. Unfortunately without an engine or natural contributions you can't generate the force to bury the anchor. I had so much confidence in our 45# CQR on chain rode I seldom backed down on the anchor. We were cruising in an area that had very weak tidal currents and steady trade winds so the boat almost never swung. Often I'd find the anchor lying on its side trailing a pile of chain after several days on the hook. The chain was providing the force to keep the boat in position. That wouldn't be the case in areas with strong tidal flows and/or winds just an example of how much force it takes to bury an anchor so it wouldn't foul. Would expect that any anchor that was buried by backing down would be susceptible to fouling in a swinging anchorage.

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by Shrew

Whether he's there first or not........people will be pissed off if they're in the middle of the anchorage.

When we come into an anchorage and see that, the first thing we say is "Look at this @#@$% @$$h0l3". We work around them and then spend the next few days laughing about them.

If the area dictates the method and/or is a common practice, that is one thing. The locations where we anchor it is not necessary. The considerate folks that do use two anchors do so close to shore or along the outskirts of the anchorage.

Honest question: If you're cruising and every day is new anchorage, and you are the first in, how do you know if "the area dictates the method and/or is a common practice...?"

[JPA Cate]

@blue_alexandra,

In places where you have 2 tides a day, and the boat swings to the tide, or maybe a cross breeze, it's a good idea to re-anchor every 2 or 3 days, some would probably say with each tide. Staying longer without re-anchoring increases the opportunity for something to go wrong, usually the chain being wrapped. It's especially true with plow type and Danforth type anchors. This is probably even more true if there is no good way to back down on the anchor.

Incidentally, when engineless, you can use the mainsail to help back down on the anchor by winging it out to windward, and preventing it there, so as to sail backwards with the bow still upwind. It's better than just blowing down, sideways, and will administer a reasonable tug on the anchor rode.

Ann

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by roverhi

Backing down to bury the anchor is the key to not fouling the anchor on tidal or wind caused change direction of pull.

...

Would expect that any anchor that was buried by backing down would be susceptible to fouling in a swinging anchorage.

So basically it is still susceptible regardless of "backing down" ?

I am wondering how the anchor will stay buried in a tide/wind change. Won't the act of rotating the anchor, (at least a bruce) cause it to rotate onto its side again? It might just stay on it's side if the conditions are not strong enough to cause it to bury again, or is this not correct?

It takes a lot of wind to stretch my 3/8th chain, maybe heavy chain is also bad?

I admit that I did anchor under light conditions this time, but then the wind did pick up and the anchor had to be set from it, later light winds for a few days, and when it picks up again I drag when the wind isn't even as strong as before. This has happened to me only 3 times in 10 years, and I am anchored 98% of the time, so it's relatively rare. There is also a lot of random junk in charleston harbor.

Maybe different anchors vary in this problem? Anyone seen this with an anchor other than bruce or danforth? It would be interesting to compare how different anchors rotate.

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by JPA Cate

@blue_alexandra,

In places where you have 2 tides a day, and the boat swings to the tide, or maybe a cross breeze, it's a good idea to re-anchor every 2 or 3 days, some would probably say with each tide. Staying longer without re-anchoring increases the opportunity for something to go wrong, usually the chain being wrapped. It's especially true with plow type and Danforth type anchors. This is probably even more true if there is no good way to back down on the anchor.

I anchored in this harbor for more than 2 months at one point without issue! I guess I'm lazy to pull my anchor every 3 days, but I should at least do it before any blow is predicted, although this was only predicted 12 knots!

Incidentally, when engineless, you can use the mainsail to help back down on the anchor by winging it out to windward, and preventing it there, so as to sail backwards with the bow still upwind. It's better than just blowing down, sideways, and will administer a reasonable tug on the anchor rode.

Ann

Wouldn't it also be possible to just sail downwind and drop it while moving full speed? I have done this, and as soon as the anchor sets, the boat very quickly turns 180. I think this makes a lot more force than back winding the mainsail.

[Jim Cate]

Wouldn't it also be possible to just sail downwind and drop it while moving full speed? I have done this, and as soon as the anchor sets, the boat very quickly turns 180. I think this makes a lot more force than back winding the mainsail.

Yes, this is an effective means of loading an anchor to achieve or test a set. I've used it sparingly when forced to anchor under sail. The down side is that it's quite possible to get the chain in "vigorous" contact with your topsides with attendant scratching of gel coat or paint. This bothers some more than others.

And FWIW, we had one similar dragging event in our previous boat, fitted eith a genuine Bruce. We'd been anchored in a cove in Bonne Anse in New Caledonia for a few days of quite strong enhanced trades, gusting to ~35 knots regularly. Eventually the wind calmed and when I went above decks before bed time to check, it looked a bit suss... I could see the Cap Undua light. Turns out we had (very quietly) dragged out of the cove, clear across the bay and re-anchored just off a reef on the other side. When I realized what had happened I got a considerable adrenaline rush! We had been anchored in coral rubble over mud... had held fine in the gusts but come dislodged when we were randomly swinging in light variable conditions... very likely from the chain fouling the stock of the Bruce.

Jim

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by boat_alexandra

Wouldn't it also be possible to just sail downwind and drop it while moving full speed? I have done this, and as soon as the anchor sets, the boat very quickly turns 180. I think this makes a lot more force than back winding the mainsail.

Yes, I agree, engineless or not, that will really set the anchor well as long as you let the scope pay out and don’t cleat it off untill you have 5:1 or so to be sure the anchor really buries. ( and of course this requires your chain and/or nylon is free to fly out of the deck plate, there won’t be any hand-over-handing)
And yes, if a boat is swinging and experiencing strong winds or currents then the anchor will pull out and resubmerge itself, if there is enough force to do so. If not, and it remains not fully buried then it can snag the chain on the next go ‘round. Btw how much chain are you laying out? I would agree that a lot of chain out would work against fully setting and burying the anchor unless you have a sufficient force to do so. (I’m pretty sure you know most of this already)
Another advantage of setting bow and stern for me anyway is that I always pull them against each other. They set better and I can tell right away if one is dragging. So if I have no engine and little wind and I drift into an anchorage, I can still be sure that my anchors are set well. Now if I did not want two out I could always let out on the bow, take up the stern then and swing on one well-set bow anchor, but in my neighborhood that’s not the custom.

[Moontide]

Originally Posted by Sailmonkey

You didn't? What about post #2?

Oops, guess I blasted through too fast.

[Teknishn]

Originally Posted by gamayun

One thing a friend told me when I drop my anchor in shallow water is to not drop the chain too quickly before the boat starts to drift back because the chain can pile up on the anchor. Maybe this is one way it could get itself wrapped before the anchor is set. Just a thought.

This

[TrentePieds]

Quote: "Honest question: If you're cruising and every day is new anchorage, and you are the first in, how do you know if "the area dictates the method and/or is a common practice...?"

Well, you don't really, I s'pose :-) But in all the anchorages in the Salish Sea that are popular with local cruising folk, including Maple Bay, there is an expectation, at least among the old hands, that you anchor fore'n'aft since we KNOW, even if we are the first in, that by nightfall in the cruising season the bay will likely be wall to wall with boats, and since we KNOW we have mixed tides of considerable flow. I think that being in first affords the opportunity to "set the tone". If you are late in, you have to live with what has already been established by others.

As we all know there are some things that don't "scale" well. Anchors are one of them, but regardless of that, all modern anchors have better holding power and are less subject to fouling than were the "fisherman" type that I grew up with.

Much of what we think we know about anchoring when we first go to sea is left-over wisdom from the days of the "windbags". But even though our anchors are better than theirs we still need to be cognizant of all the things the skippers and mates of old had to reckon with: type of bottom, the tides, the weather forecast, the peculiarities of our own vessel, etc. Fore'n'afters without an auxiliary engine don't back well, fin-keelers particularly not. Square riggers could be made to back quite nicely and exert considerable force on the rode to set the hook. Square riggers didn't "hunt" the way e.g. TrentePieds does. She's so bad at that (because the designer was so much a victim of the PHRF rule, and the PO "improved" the rig, that she doesn't know whether she is fish or fowl - cruiser or racer). Well, the "cure" is most often quite simple: Set the bower over the stern! Then she will lie still for obvious reasons. If people look at me funny - so be it :-)! In days of yore when there were fewer boats about, and therefore more "elbow room", I often sailed stuff like Catalina 27s with a puny 9.9 hung on the transom. Then I would also set my bower over the stern. I'd come in under headsail alone at 2 or 3 knots, pass over the spot I wanted the anchor to be, and running dead before, run out the rode through my hands. When I was just short of where I wanted the boat to be, I'd let fly sheets and slip the running rode onto a sheet winch (the "wrong" way about) for friction to stop the run and set the hook. Danforths would "kite", Bruces never did.

3 knots equates to something like 5 feet per second, and that can give you a nasty rope burn, so there is wisdom in wearing gloves if you try this technique. And do not let you fingers get caught twixt the rode and the winch ;-)! Altogether, your tackle should be carefully laid out in preparation for the evolution. But if you do do that, and you take care with its execution, it's a perfectly valid technique for anchoring a "pure" fore'n'after.

TrentePieds

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by Sailmonkey

Any anchor that isn’t pulled hard enough in the opposite direction is susceptible to this same sort of failure.

It’s one of the scenarios where a Bahamian moor makes sense (except for the twisted rode).

This is your answer in my opinion, you bury the sucker when first set. then the chain will skip over it as there is nothing to catch the chain
i've dove it, it doesn't reset unless a strong wind or current, but even then it stayed buried, usually.
As you don't have an engine I think you are going to have to live with it,
in hard bottom I can't bury the thing even with the engine, but I have probably an illegocially oversized anchor.

[Mike Banks]

It is not the anchor, all anchors may be affected unless well buried--and they often un-bury when the tide changes and without the engine to set them never bury deeply enough to escape the chain looping around them. The worst offenders are the grapnel types, they are always catching chains.

What I recommend is that you stream a small drogue with a float from the stern, on a bridle short enough that the propeller can not be fouled by it. This will catch the tide and keep the wind from blowing you back over your anchor--but it is not a perfect solution--just the one that will stop it happening some of the time.

If you want to stop it happening ALL of the time, you will have other options using two anchors --a Bahamian set, or a stern and bow set. If using the Bahamian set, fit a swivel where the three chains join, so that the one to the boat can turn freely..