Anchor for Chesapeake

[ranger58sb]

We're on the Chesapeake. We occasionally find holding ground other than mud (grass, sand, shells)... but usually it's mud, and then the question is about whether it's hard mud, soft mud, or gooey slime.

We carry several anchors. One is a Fortress; Danforth-style, but larger for the same weight, adjustable for normal mud versus slime, and in fact now we keep it dismantled and carry it as a good spare. Still, it always worked fine when we had it mounted as our primary, within the limits of that quick-reset thing (quick storm, 180° rotation, may or may not reset quickly enough in storm conditions). Good anchor, though, and except for one cyclic thunderstorm, always worked great. Recommend two sizes larger than whatever Fortress says for your boat weight/shape/length.

Or primary is a heavy adjustable SuperMax. We have never had it pull out, in any holding ground in any circumstance, and in fact it sometimes takes some work to get it loose. Recommend you use either the manufacturer's guidelines or go one size up BUT it's a heavy sucker, so this is maybe for only if you have a decent (electric?) windlass.

We have used a Delta on a previous boat, and carry one as a spare. Recommend two sizes larger than whatever Delta says.... but that gets heavy too. The Delta could "travel" in slime, depending on windage and weight on the hook (ours started to fail with an 8-boat raft in slime once), but other wise does OK mostly... and when you have a heavy one, it'll usually set somewhat faster in grass than would a Danforth style. No moving parts.

Washdown is good. In fact, we went from all-chain rode to a 25' chain leader followed by 300' of rope... specifically because getting the mud off the anchor and the chain can be such an issue.

I don't have any experience with the newer anchors you're seeing recommended, so can't comment on those.

-Chris

[Paul Annapolis]

Lots of good comments here. .. and yes major and violent shiFts can occur duRing summer t storms sometimes at night but usually in the late afternoon so resetting is an issue but I would again stipulate that there should always be a minimum blank out preferably chain even though chain will be messy to clean off weather you anchor in eight feet of water or 10 feet of water you will need a lot of scope and the rule for five to one or 7 to 10 or whatever it may be comes into play in deep water but in shallow Chesapeake water you should always have 10 to 1 just so you have the minimum amount of catenary needed. And almost wherever you go in the Chesapeake it will be mud and ooze and a fluke t type anchor such as the gym Danforth or fortress is generally bestwhen it comes to issues of anchoring the type and size of anchor is not as important as other issues of seamanship such as choosing the proper place to anchor setting the anchor properly and paying attention.

[Stu Jackson]

Why NEW GEN Anchors are Better:

Anchors & TEST Results of New Generation Anchors EXCELLENT & Important

Anchor System Sizing Tables (Reply #6) Ground Tackle & Anchor System Sizing TABLES & SwivelsGround Tackle & Anchor System Sizing TABLES & Swivels

[JonJo]

I've read Mainsail's post

Many anchor makers go out their way to show how their anchors work in a hard substrate. Some even manage to show that their anchor will penetrate a hard seabed and none other anchor will make any impression (even though some of these anchors are renowned to work (but that's marketing). Mainsail makes a similar comment when he described how his Supreme sets so much more quickly than the CQR (in a hard substrate) - if he can get the CQR (and he lumps the Bruce into this category as well) to even penetrate.

This is not the case with the OPs request. it seems the Chesapeake is renowned not for having hard impenetrable surface but one that is the exact opposite.

Is it being suggested that all new gen anchors are the answer to a yachtsmen's prayer and work efficiently and effectively in all seabeds, hard or soft - or is there some differentiation?

My view remains, despite Mainsail's comments - that anchors are still a compromise and if surface area is the criteria (and Mainsail makes a pretty big issue of it) then there are anchors with a higher surface area than a Supreme.

Jonathan

[noelex 77]

Welcome to the forum.

Danforth anchors hold exceptionally well in mud with a constant direction of pull, but a 22lb is too small for your boat and I would relegate it to kedge duties. Not as good a kedge as a Fortress, but 22lb is still light enough to easily handle.

For the replacment primary anchor I would not use a Danforth, as there is always some concern about the risk of them breaking out with a change in wind.

Any of the concave new generation anchors would be my choice. The concave shape ensures high resistance in very soft mud. Due of their larger surface area the roll bar anchors have a slight edge on the Spade in very soft substrates, but the Spade is still excellent if the roll bar anchors do not fit.

As has been pointed out the concave anchors will bring up a lot of mud, but it is easy to clean off (muddy chain on the other hand can be very frustrating), but its a small price to pay for the reliable holding.

[Fortress]

In addition to surface area, another key component of anchor performance in soft mud is the shank / fluke angle. In harder soils, a 32° angle will produce optimal results, but in softer soils an anchor will not penetrate as deeply nor will it provide anywhere near the holding power at this angle.

This fact is what led our company founder to develop and patent the adjustable shank / fluke angle for 32° and 45°. We have exhibited at the US Sailboat Show in Annapolis for the past 15 years or so and we have learned that a high percentage of Fortress owners in the Chesapeake Bay area use the 45° angle with great success.

Making an anchor with wider shank / fluke angle to improve holding power performance in soft mud is common among large manufacturers such as the US Navy and Vryhoff, and below is a brief discussion from 2 pages in Vyhoff's anchoring manual.

Regards,
Brian

[redsky49]

I get the sense that the original poster may not have much experience in anchoring or operating a boat of this size, or is perhaps unfamiliar with the Chesapeake (please excuse me if I am off base. I don't mean to insult), and is seeking true guidance rather than some beauty contest opinion fest.

If that is the case, and this is to be his primary, and perhaps only adequate anchor, I think we should all be cautious in our responses.

While I have certainly used Danforths in the past (as well as Delta, CQR, Brittany,etc.) and they are all adequate in certain circumstances, they are certainly less effective overall than the modern alternatives. If one could be certain that their anchoring locations consisted of only one condition such as mud, a Fortress might be perfectly adequate, assuming that the size and shape of the anchor suited the OP, and that he was not anchoring in an area that did not have such a current that the anchor "sails", rather than sinking into the substrate, etc. Maybe horses for courses?

But if the OP travels a bit afield from the bay (clearly a possibility), he will certainly face anchoring conditions - bottom type, wave action, wind, current, etc., that may very well call for a hook with far different capabilities than an anchor designed more than 75 years ago. In those situations, a Danforth would be a very poor choice. I used a CQR for years, until the exceedingly improved performance of the modern diving anchors was simply undeniable.

There are spots in the bay where there is a clay substrate. A Danforth, particularly a #22 one will just skate along. If you add weeds, rocks, etc., you are going to be hard-pressed to get a good set with this anchor. Danforths will get debris wedged between the flukes, though I suspect that the majority of the bent shank Danforth anchors have had the rode wrapped in the gap between the flukes and the shank.

Mention has been made of squalls in the bay. These occur most frequently in July and August, and are presaged by a copper colored sky, usually after 3:00pm. These can be as ferocious as any storm, short of a hurricane. Thankfully, they are generally short lived. If you are to take shelter, and are not fully confidant of your ground tackle, as well as your anchoring technique, you are a potential danger to yourself, and to anyone on board your vessel, not to mention any nearby vessels.

The OP should address his anchor choice, his current and future cruising grounds, anchor rode - particularly size and length of chain - frequency of anchoring (if staying exclusively at marinas, other criteria may apply), etc. This should be a thoughtful decision, hopefully based on more than internet experts, myself included. If all else fails, consult Chapman's, or any of the tomes that cover anchoring.

When the wind is howling, and the boat is heeling, whipped by horizontal rain while lightning rings your boat, you don't want to be questioning your anchor shackle or whether you should have spent a few dollars more for a better/bigger anchor.

Be smart. Be safe.

Just my opinion.

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Danforth anchors hold exceptionally well in mud with a constant direction of pull, but a 22lb is too small for your boat and I would relegate it to kedge duties. Not as good a kedge as a Fortress, but 22lb is still light enough to easily handle.

For the replacment primary anchor I would not use a Danforth, as there is always some concern about the risk of them breaking out with a change in wind.

Any of the concave new generation anchors would be my choice. The concave shape ensures high resistance in very soft mud. Due of their larger surface area the roll bar anchors have a slight edge on the Spade in very soft substrates, but the Spade is still excellent if the roll bar anchors do not fit.

As has been pointed out the concave anchors will bring up a lot of mud, but it is easy to clean off (muddy chain on the other hand can be very frustrating), but its a small price to pay for the reliable holding.

+1 on this

[ranger58sb]

I should have thought to mention we use the SuperMax anchor here in the Chesapeake specifically because of the mud, and specifically because of some favorable performance testing previously published by Cap'n Wil Andrews. (Google it.)

The "fluke" shape is kinda like the bucket on a backhoe.

We've only used it around here, so I don't know how it might perform in other areas.

-Chris

[Fortress]

Redsky,

At the sailboat show I have heard stories as you described about the sudden change of weather there in the mid-afternoon, and also that on occasion those changes occur in the black of night as well, which obviously has to be even more scary.

It might be good for the OP to have a discussion with the anchor manufacturers themselves (new or old generation) about their own extensive product testing to see what kind of a drop off in performance could be expected in soft mud.

This will help to insure that he properly sizes up his anchor for the expected poor holding in soft mud.

You also mentioned Chapman's as a possible resource for anchoring information, and here is what Elbert S. Maloney, who authored “Chapman’s Piloting & Seamanship” for several decades, has said about Fortress:

“I’ve used a Fortress as my primary anchor in sand and mud bottoms for more than 20 years. I have found the Fortress to be thoroughly dependable.”

Ranger42c, I have heard great things about the SuperMax in the Chesapeake. This anchor also has three different angle positions, and maybe you have used it on the highest setting in the Chesapeake, which is for it's "soft mud" setting?

[motion30]

free tractor price look at the 65 pounds mantus . you sleep well at night. that weight on your boat sounds lite

[Hud3]

Over the years, on various boats, I've used Danforth, Bruce and Delta anchors on the Chesapeake. The Danforth was fine in the mud and sand, but had trouble setting and holding on oyster shell and heavy eel grass bottoms. The Bruce was great in the mud and sand, but took some technique to efficiently set in the grass. The Delta was great overall, and would reset itself when the wind reversed direction. The only problem I had with it was when anchored in the enclosed basin at Somers Cove Marina in Chrisfield, Maryland. A thunderstorm kicked up in the middle of the night, and the 35 knot gusts caused the Delta to start dragging. I managed to keep off the leeward bulkhead at the Coast Guard station by motoring in place for twenty minutes until the wind died down. To be fair, the bottom there is a really soft, soupy mud. I'm not sure any anchor would have held.

Given all that I've read here in the anchor threads over the last several years, my choice if buying a new anchor for use in the Bay would be one of the new generation types. Having a good, high-pressure wash-down hose at the bow and a stiff, long-handled scrub brush would be absolutely mandatory. That sticky, black Chesapeake Bay mud is the devil to get off.

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by Fortress

You also mentioned Chapman's as a possible resource for anchoring information, and here is what Elbert S. Maloney, who authored “Chapman’s Piloting & Seamanship” for several decades, has said about Fortress:

“I’ve used a Fortress as my primary anchor in sand and mud bottoms for more than 20 years. I have found the Fortress to be thoroughly dependable.”

Ranger42c, I have heard great things about the SuperMax in the Chesapeake. This anchor also has three different angle positions, and maybe you have used it on the highest setting in the Chesapeake, which is for it's "soft mud" setting?

I've been very pleased with our Fortress. The only time we had that reset problem was during one of those circular squalls, where we literally circled our anchor in the space of about 4 minutes. We were anchored so close to our home dock, though, that it was just easier to bring the anchor in and get docked -- and get the dog walked -- before the rain came, so we didn't even really give the anchor time to see if it would have reset.

We've only had to use the middle setting on the SuperMax, and in fact we've only used the 32° setting on the Fortress... although there have been a couple times with each where the "mud" setting would probably have been better if we had been staying longer. I haven't had to use the Fortress mud palms yet, either, but as with the angle setting, same thing: there were a few times/places where the extra effort to adjust/install.etc. would have been worth it for peace of mind during a longer stay. Some of this is also influenced by knowing a bit about some of the places where the ooze is a bit more slimey than usual, and having discovered those, it's usually easier to just anchor somewhere else

-Chris

[redsky49]

Originally Posted by Fortress

Redsky,

At the sailboat show I have heard stories as you described...

You also mentioned Chapman's as a possible resource for anchoring information, and here is what Elbert S. Maloney, who authored “Chapman’s Piloting & Seamanship” for several decades, has said about Fortress:

“I’ve used a Fortress as my primary anchor in sand and mud bottoms for more than 20 years. I have found the Fortress to be thoroughly dependable.”...

Not a knock on Fortress. I also carry a Fortress FX-55 that served me well fending off a glancing blow from a hurricane several years ago.

[Fortress]

Originally Posted by ranger42c

I haven't had to use the Fortress mud palms yet, either, but as with the angle setting, same thing: there were a few times/places where the extra effort to adjust/install.etc. would have been worth it for peace of mind during a longer stay. Some of this is also influenced by knowing a bit about some of the places where the ooze is a bit more slimey than usual, and having discovered those, it's usually easier to just anchor somewhere else

-Chris

Chris,

Thanks for your reply & info. Please permanently install the Mud Palms on your anchor, as they will help it set faster in ANY type of bottom. The Mud Palms lift the back end of the anchor up so that the flukes take a more aggressive angle into the sea bottom.

Also, an important FYI: While the holding power will dramatically improve at the 45° angle in soft mud, there is a huge downside to this setting in that the anchor is not likely to set at this wider angle in a harder soil.

So, use the 45° angle only if: 1. You need more holding power and 2. It is a known soft mud bottom.

It sounds as though you are on top of the situation there in knowing the local bottoms and by having two superb mud anchors. Glad to hear it!

Brian