Best complimentary second anchor?

[Jman]

Originally Posted by GrahamHO

Seems others have had Danforth / Fortress sail like a kite. Once in a yacht race in a friends yacht, the wind died and we started to go backwards in a tidal rip. Tried to anchor with a Danforth and it streamed out in front not reaching the bottom.



Once I was anchored with a large genuine Danforth in sand. Overnight a cold front with over 40 knots came through and the wind changed about 270*. We were just fine but when I pulled the Danforth up, it's shank was bent through almost 90*. The Fortress appears to me to have stronger shank than the Danforth.



I'm planning to buy a Vulcan as I'm impressed with the design but untried by me. They have a hole in the front to attach a buoy rope or another anchor. My plan is to use the Vulcan but if I'm expecting a blow, I'll shackle my Fortress in tandem, in front, on a couple of metres of extra chain. That should prevent the Fortress turning into a kite.



I was once anchored in over 50 knots with just a Fortress which held on fine. It was a muddy bottom and about 3 metres deep at low tide. I didn't sleep much that night. The noise was like riding down the back of a jumbo jet. We were in a tidal creek and the wind blew along it.

There are some interesting other threads on the idea of tandem anchors. In storm condition the rode, however heavy will put upward force on the nearest anchor, lifting it clear of the bottom, essentially making it useless, because the farthest anchor is preventing it from having a chance to dig in properly. I believe that this thinking is left over from the older gen anchors, and the weight of it is really no different than a cantanary weight.

I could see the "sailing" occurring, but I would think that would be if you are already going backwards at a pretty good clip. If it has chance to dig in (and it can given the substrate), then it's sailing days are over, so to speak.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[model 10]

I would get the one that looks the best on your bow. If it's a back-up, it will always just be sitting there. It should look and intrude as little as possible.

[DumnMad]

Originally Posted by darylat8750

What NOLEX77 said.

+2

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by Franziska

Hi,

I have currently a16kg spade style anchor on my cat (see attachment).
This is the prime anchor, it is used with 12m chain and a loooong rode, and sometimes a riding weight.

Boatsize of the cat is 10.70m x 6.10m x 4.5metric Tons (35ft x 20ft, 9920lbs).
No anchor windlass.
...
We have also a large Fortress on board.
Still I want to add a second steel anchor for long distance cruising.

I'm looking for a versatile second anchor which should possibly cover holding ground in which the spade excels less good.

Any recommendations?
Franziska

The spade-type is a good all-around anchor. The Fortress is good in very soft mud and for ultimate holding power in sand.

What it looks like you are missing is an anchor that excels in rock/cobbles and weeds/kelp. For that I would get a Luke, or similar Admiralty/Herschoff/yachtsman/fisherman's anchor. The Luke disassembles into 3 pieces for easier handling.

[GrahamHO]

Originally Posted by Jman

There are some interesting other threads on the idea of tandem anchors. In storm condition the rode, however heavy will put upward force on the nearest anchor, lifting it clear of the bottom, essentially making it useless, because the farthest anchor is preventing it from having a chance to dig in properly. I believe that this thinking is left over from the older gen anchors, and the weight of it is really no different than a cantanary weight.

I could see the "sailing" occurring, but I would think that would be if you are already going backwards at a pretty good clip. If it has chance to dig in (and it can given the substrate), then it's sailing days are over, so to speak.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

That's an interesting theory about one anchor holding the other. Tandem anchors were suggested to me by a commercial fisherman friend. I haven't tried them but I'm looking for a possible use for my Fortress.

Just a guess but if the furthest anchor were dug in enough to allow the primary anchor to pull out, surley there is no problem until it too pulls out at which time the main anchor might dig in. Two anchors in tandem should
be harder to pull than a single but I don't really know.

My main anchor is a faithful Bruce which I'm tempted to replace with a Vulcan because it might be even better.

I was in San Francisco a few weeks ago and looked at a large ketch dark blue from memory moored close to the Embarcadero. It had a Bruce anchor protruding from a port in the stem. I'm sure it was chosen because it wrapped nicely around each side of the stem and looked nice. A Vulcan would have spoiled it's looks and likely scratched it's paint.

[model 10]

Originally Posted by GrahamHO

That's an interesting theory about one anchor holding the other. Tandem anchors were suggested to me by a commercial fisherman friend. I haven't tried them but I'm looking for a possible use for my Fortress.

In beautiful clear water about 10' deep I watched our Rocna with an FX-23 in tandem. The FX-23 would dig in, the chain came taught and the rocna would lift straight up. The tip was hardly touching the bottom.

[GrahamHO]

Originally Posted by Guy

In beautiful clear water about 10' deep I watched our Rocna with an FX-23 in tandem. The FX-23 would dig in, the chain came taught and the rocna would lift straight up. The tip was hardly touching the bottom.

I'll take that as a good test. Though to be able to see both anchors you must have been almost over the top rather than having say 40' of chain / warp out.
You have nevertheless talked me out of trying tandem anchors.
I'll pension my Fortress off to act as a stern anchor occasionally. It's light enough to row out in a dinghy.

As an aside more or less off topic. I got my friend with a foundry to cast me an aluminum Bruce anchor using my original one as a pattern. It was just an experiment to see whether weight or blade area was more important.

It held just as well as the steel one in mud. It would dig in and stop the boat against the reversed engine with a Kiwi Feathering prop and lots of reverse thrust. However it would not dig in at all on a harder bottom with a mixture of shells and mud. Dropping it even slowly from the bow it would curve down and forward due to its foil like shape and 1/3 the weight of the steel one.

The experiment was a success in that it dissuaded me from buying an expensive aluminum anchor (not Fortress) with the hope of saving weight.

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

We have a Fortress 55 to be used as a kedge. I really don't understand how or why this model merits such high praises, it would never hold anyplace here in Sardinia in the weed and hard sand bottoms. Sure, it holds great in mud and sand, but what anchor doesn't?

Don't know about sand, but a Delta doesn't always do great in soft mud.

Originally Posted by GrahamHO

Seems others have had Danforth / Fortress sail like a kite. Once in a yacht race in a friends yacht, the wind died and we started to go backwards in a tidal rip. Tried to anchor with a Danforth and it streamed out in front not reaching the bottom.

That's why I asked (above, no answer yet) about which model/weight of Fortress exhibited that behavior. I've heard of the small/lighter ones doing that, but not so much with the larger/heavier ones.

And it also implies some may be trying to set the things at 10 knots in reverse or some such.

Still, would be useful to know about sizes/weights that might "sail." I've not seen that with ours, even as small as the FX-23 we used on a previous boat, and certainly not on our current FX-37.

-Chris

[Fortress]

Yesterday I finished exhibiting at the 5 day US Sailboat Show in Annapolis, Maryland, which drew a respectable crowd of sailors from all over the world.

We had a steady flow of visitors to our display stand, and their observations and uses of our product were consistent with what I have heard during the past 15+ years of working this show:

- Many cruisers have a Fortress stored below deck as the "Ultimate Storm Anchor," particularly those who are planning trips to the Caribbean and beyond.

No other anchor has ever achieved the holding ratios (holding capacity divided by anchor weight) of the Fortress (over 300x in some tests) in common sand, mud, or clay bottoms, so their reasoning is sound and well-justified.


- The Fortress is oftentimes used as a kedge or as a stern anchor to keep the boat from swinging due to its lightness and ease of deployment.

- It is also used on occasion as a secondary anchor that is deployed off the bow by hand in a Bahamian mooring, and for the same reasons as noted above.


- Local sailors in the Chesapeake Bay have often experienced difficulties of holding tight in the soft mud bottoms, which is made even more difficult by the frequent high winds they encounter.

The fact that a Fortress anchor can be adjusted to a wider shank / fluke angle (45°) insures that it will offer vastly superior performance in soft mud, and so many sailors use it nearby as their primary anchor.


- While new generation anchors have made some inroads into the sailing market, it was clear from our visitors and from the sailboats on the docks that there are still a wide majority of sailors who rely on Bruce, CQR, and Delta for their primary anchors.

- The most experienced of cruisers almost always had an arsenal of anchors aboard, and typically multiple types to insure that they had "the right tool for the job."

Safe anchoring,
Brian

[model 10]

[QUOTE=GrahamHO;1935826]I'll take that as a good test. Though to be able to see both anchors you must have been almost over the top rather than having say 40' of chain / warp out.

I was in the water with a mask. There was 50' of chain out and 12' of chain between the 25kg rocna and the FX-23. It was a very hard bottom and the fx dug in better than the rocna.

[GrahamHO]

Originally Posted by ranger42c

Don't know about sand, but a Delta doesn't always do great in soft mud.





That's why I asked (above, no answer yet) about which model/weight of Fortress exhibited that behavior. I've heard of the small/lighter ones doing that, but not so much with the larger/heavier ones.

And it also implies some may be trying to set the things at 10 knots in reverse or some such.i

Still, would be useful to know about sizes/weights that might "sail." I've not seen that with ours, even as small as the FX-23 we used on a previous boat, and certainly not on our current FX-37.

-Chris

I can't motor 10 knots in forward let alone reverse. I have seen big powerboats try anchoring at 10 knots in reverse though. I use the usual method of drifting back slowly and then testing with the motor. The Danforth always dug in or occasionally I'd try again. What I had experienced when I used to use a Danforth was once they drag for whatever reason they don't dig in again. A stone wedged between the flukes happened more than once, and anchored in sea grass a turf pulled out by its roots. With a CQR the point penetrated a bottle, and another time a horse mussel both times dragging. My Bruce has never dragged so far over maybe 10 years. As I mentioned earlier a Danforth bent its shank through around 90* when anchored in sand and there was a 40 knot wind change overnight perhaps 20 years ago. The Danforth suiting sand must have been buried half way to China and it didn't drag on that occasion. That's just some of my anchoring experience over +40 years. Others in other locations will have different experience. I like the look of the new Vulcan and can only find out by trying it. However the main reason I'm hesitating is that the Bruce works so well for me. I don't think the genuine ones like mine are manufactured now as there are Chinese copies around.

[GrahamHO]

[QUOTE=Guy;1936205]

Originally Posted by GrahamHO

I'll take that as a good test. Though to be able to see both anchors you must have been almost over the top rather than having say 40' of chain / warp out.

I was in the water with a mask. There was 50' of chain out and 12' of chain between the 25kg rocna and the FX-23. It was a very hard bottom and the fx dug in better than the rocna.

Thanks. That's put me off trying tandem. What did you do then apart from getting out of the water? Did you just let it be as it must have been holding?
Seems as if the Rocna might have been acting like an anchor buddy for the FX, helping it dig in.

[model 10]

[QUOTE=GrahamHO;1936302]

Originally Posted by Guy

Thanks. That's put me off trying tandem. What did you do then apart from getting out of the water? Did you just let it be as it must have been holding?
Seems as if the Rocna might have been acting like an anchor buddy for the FX, helping it dig in.

That would make it a pretty big and expensive "anchor buddy". Thankfully it wasn't a wx issue just a holding problem. I would never use that set up in a storm.

[Franziska]

Hi everybody.
You are all a very helpful resource. Amazing & a big thank-you!

Few comments from my end.

The Fortress I have is medium size. See attachment.
Great for shallow water with soft substrate.

The situation when it turned into a kite was in a tidal channel 4-5kn at about 8m (24ft) depth.
We had to temporarily abandon our primary and I dropped the Fortress while drifting with 40m (120ft) rode.
It did not catch.

When in a more shallow spot it worked nicely.

As a backup I will surely keep it.

What noelex said seems a good idea.
Put the current Bugel (Btw. Bügel is the German word for the rollbar) as reserve and get a slightly more heavy secondary such as the Manson supreme.

For rocks/coral I am considering as last reserve a large grapnel or collapsible Admiral derivate.

Thanks again to all of you,

Fran

[Fortress]

Franziska,

You should have the Mud Palms installed on your Fortress anchor, as they will help it set faster in any type of sea bottom.

The Mud Palms are a set of two metal plates that bolt on to both sides of the Crown, which is the center part of the anchor. They will lift the back end of the anchor up so that the Flukes take a more aggressive angle into the sea bottom.

If you don't have the Mud Palms, then send me a PM with your address and I will ship you out a set.

Please find below an image of the anchor with the Mud Palms installed.

Be safe,
Brian