Anchoring Perfectionism vs Realities of Soft Mud

[Don C L]

I think the answer, and I know I post this way too often, is 2 Fortresses Bahamian. I think just about any anchor in mud will develop that cement blob pile-up that reduces its ability to dive. Once a Fortress (or Danforth) starts diving I think it will continue, but once it is pulled to one side it starts to drag the fouling blob with it and won't re-set. (That is only my theory since I have not been able to witness it in action... only pulled up giant slimey blobs.) Thus, I vote for 2. This is probably one of those that Noelex won't be able to get any shots of though. Pity.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Don C L

I think the answer, and I know I post this way too often, is 2 Fortresses Bahamian. I think just about any anchor in mud will develop that cement blob pile-up that reduces its ability to dive. Once a Fortress (or Danforth) starts diving I think it will continue, but once it is pulled to one side it starts to drag the fouling blob with it and won't re-set. (That is only my theory since I have not been able to witness it in action... only pulled up giant slimey blobs.) Thus, I vote for 2. This is probably one of those that Noelex won't be able to get any shots of though. Pity.

In my experiencing there are 3 problems:

1. Very few people carry 2 Fortress anchors. Thus, one of the anchors will be weaker in the mud and will drag.
2. You may not decide you need a 2 anchor until later. That will mean lifting whatever you put down and setting 2 anchors, perhaps as a storm reproaches.
3. A Bahamian is not the strongest use of 2 anchors, particularly not if one drags.

This is why I suggest using a scoop anchor near and a Fortress in a longer V leg in the direction of the anticipated blast. Stronger and suitable for a pair of dissimilar anchors.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by thinwater

In my experiencing there are 3 problems:

1. Very few people carry 2 Fortress anchors. Thus, one of the anchors will be weaker in the mud and will drag.
2. You may not decide you need a 2 anchor until later. That will mean lifting whatever you put down and setting 2 anchors, perhaps as a storm reproaches.
3. A Bahamian is not the strongest use of 2 anchors, particularly not if one drags.

This is why I suggest using a scoop anchor near and a Fortress in a longer V leg in the direction of the anticipated blast. Stronger and suitable for a pair of dissimilar anchors.

I am allergic to poly-anchoring because of the tangling which inevitably occurs in tidal waters. You really can't use two anchors where you spin around in the tide. The resulting mess can take all day to untangle. Once was enough for me.

[JPA Cate]

Yes, and I really don't have any trouble deploying the Fortress. I have a very large anchor locker (I can crouch in it) and the Fortress just lives inside it with 150 meters of polyester rode and a chain leader all rigged and ready to go. All I have to do is reach in and throw it out. I just didn't think about it. Next time maybe I'll try it.
__________________

That really seems quite an easy approach. In soft mud, we've used our old Danforth out in a "V" with the boat at the bottom of the "V", concurrently with our NG, and that was all it took to stop the dragging. In our case, it is not easy to have it ready to go, must be got out and hauled forward, to deploy from the bow.

In your case, if you're in a tidal stream, yes, it's hard to trust the Fortress, given what we read and see on CF. However, Jim and I spent many nights a long time ago on that same Danforth, while aware of its possible failure modes, and it never failed through a tidal cycle. My point being that we tend to dwell on worst case phenomena. The fact of our experience is there. Certainly, give it a go. If necessary, set an alarm to get yourself up at max current flow, to check it. Then, finding it okay, go back to sleep...or whatever.

And yes, set an anchor alarm, but like all electronics, expect it to not work sometime. It does make one feel more secure, even if one's fate is still in the hands of the gods.

Ann

[Mike OReilly]

Ah, been away for a while. Been thinking about the problem. When we deal with problematic bottoms like weeds or soft I let the anchor settle in slowly. Drop, then gently tug at arounf 3-4:1. Tug is usually with boat momentum. I'm feeling it all along with hand or foot so I can tell what the anchor is doing. Slowly feed out to desired scope and let it sit for a bit.

In a few cases wind has dug us in. Usually we'll come back to it in an hour or so and start the engine to set.

Re RPMs, our normal motoring revs are 2000 or less. We set at around 1700 sustained pull for a few minutes.

I don't use an anchor alarm, although I sometimes set a waypoint on the digital charts to see how we're doing. Would like to use an alarm, I'm just not smart enough to get it set at the right time. I'll get smarter ... maybe.

P.s. I guess I should read before writing. I see Paul has basically said the same thing. Ignore...

Why go fast, when you can go slow

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Maybe this is the time to get the Fortress out. The Fortress doesn't actually have any problem with soft mud. Dives right in.

Like most of us, I consider the Fortress to be unsuitable for overnight anchoring, but I'm not sure that the lore this is based on is actually all that valid.

I have spent a few nights lying to my Fortress in tidal waters and had no problems. That doesn't prove anything, but maybe worth some further experiments.

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Yes, I rationalize (ha, ha) my compromise in anchoring standards, by telling myself that half throttle is way more force than any expected wind.

But how do we know, that Danforth-style anchors don't reset? I always heard this and always assumed it must be true, but is it really a fact?

I have a feeling that in soft mud that this problem might not exist -- Fortress anchors dive very deep and are hard, very hard to retrieve, in soft bottoms. So why would there be any problem resetting? Considering what a b***tch they are to get out of a soft bottom, I can't believe that they just pop out, when the wind changes direction.

We used our Fortress for quite a while here in the soft mud of the Chesapeake. Never had problems with tidal movements. I too suspect that's a myth partly based on the truth that flows from poor setting techniques in the first place. Our biggest problem was retrieving the thing!

And we can't use full throttle -- 900 hp -- to set anchors, anyway. I'd describe our setting technique as semi-gentle, repetitive tugs... starting at the scope Fortress recommends... then finishing with scope adjustments if necessary for that specific anchorage and the current circumstances.

Set the anchor well, start Happy Hour while keeping an eye on things, return to the task later to add a bit more force to the set, done.

FWIW, we switched to our SuperMAX once we got the windlass installed to handle the weight, and it does very well! in soft mud, too. You might google some testing done by Capt' Wil Andrews in the '90's some time; one of his favorite testing places for hurricane holding power was soupy mud, NC I think.

-Chris

[Stumble]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

That sounds like all these bottoms.

Have you tried a Fortress? That might be what you need there with that bottom. If you put the "mud palms" on it and set the blades at 45 degrees, it will really hold in soupy mud. It's quite remarkable.

Ya, we had a big Fortress with mud palms on it. It would just keep going deeper and deeper, but the bottom is so soft it never really set. This is all river mud silt with almost no clay or sand layers. Just for the fun of it I once set the Fortress at 15:1 scope (15' pulpit to bottom) and backed down until we were at the same angle on the scope was at 10:1 (that's a lot of buried chain), the anchor still wasn't really set.

[UNCIVILIZED]

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

That really seems quite an easy approach. In soft mud, we've used our old Danforth out in a "V" with the boat at the bottom of the "V", concurrently with our NG, and that was all it took to stop the dragging. In our case, it is not easy to have it ready to go, must be got out and hauled forward, to deploy from the bow.

In your case, if you're in a tidal stream, yes, it's hard to trust the Fortress, given what we read and see on CF. However, Jim and I spent many nights a long time ago on that same Danforth, while aware of its possible failure modes, and it never failed through a tidal cycle. My point being that we tend to dwell on worst case phenomena. The fact of our experience is there. Certainly, give it a go. If necessary, set an alarm to get yourself up at max current flow, to check it. Then, finding it okay, go back to sleep...or whatever.

And yes, set an anchor alarm, but like all electronics, expect it to not work sometime. It does make one feel more secure, even if one's fate is still in the hands of the gods.

Ann

Ann, what do you & Jim do in terms of having 2 rodes in play, given that you only have one bow roller, if memory serves? What do you do in order to avoid them chafing & tangling one another?

Thanks.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Stumble

Ya, we had a big Fortress with mud palms on it. It would just keep going deeper and deeper, but the bottom is so soft it never really set. This is all river mud silt with almost no clay or sand layers. Just for the fun of it I once set the Fortress at 15:1 scope (15' pulpit to bottom) and backed down until we were at the same angle on the scope was at 10:1 (that's a lot of buried chain), the anchor still wasn't really set.

Good God, that sounds like the seabed from hell.

[UNCIVILIZED]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

Funny, cause I can almost always drag my 25 kg Rocna a considerable distance at full throttle so I have always just used about 2000 RPM to set, I've always thought that was the Autoprop, cause its as efficient in reverse as it is in fwd and full RPM is available, but you have an Autoprop too?
Wonder what the difference is? I feel pretty sure I will not be able to drag the 40 Kg Rocna however.

Okay, the above is confusing to me, in light of your recent concerns about purchasing too large of an anchor in another thread. For in that thread, I don't recall any mention of your commonly being able to drag your current anchor around at will like a child's pull toy. Yet there was a Lot of hesitation to go with an anchor of the size mentioned above.
To the point where I took serious heat about suggesting a super sized anchor, & in multiple threads. Started by various folks.

So why now the switch to an anchor 2x the size of your current one?

[boatman61]

I'm still an anchoring 'Imperfectionist'..
I use the boats weight to bed in the anchor as opposed to the engine..
But as I always say.. its what I do.. but don't advise others to do..

[Lepke]

I sat out 65k winds in this boat and don't believe the wind came close to a full power back down.
Either the hook is set or it's not. A proper scope, especially with chain limits the ability of an anchor to work itself out. And then, the scope and chain make a proper anchor reset if it drags.
I've anchored hundreds of times in ships and boats and only dragged once when I failed to account for the tide. I set my anchor at idle on one engine. Unless my goal is to plow the bottom. And then it's hard to keep my rows straight.

[chris95040]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

But how do we know, that Danforth-style anchors don't reset? I always heard this and always assumed it must be true, but is it really a fact?

True. I certainly feel like a danforth, with its moving parts and light weight, is more likely to have trouble resetting... But my actual experience with them is limited to waterskiing lunch breaks when I was a kid.

Originally Posted by Ann T. Cate

However, Jim and I spent many nights a long time ago on that same Danforth, while aware of its possible failure modes, and it never failed through a tidal cycle. My point being that we tend to dwell on worst case phenomena. The fact of our experience is there.

And there's that.

And with a drag alarm running on your GPS, and another on your smart phone, and positioning yourself where you've got time to react to dragging... I think I could fall asleep ok.

[FSMike]

1) I'm glad to find out what an "ng" anchor is. Is there some good reason to not just say what the brand of anchor is?

2) Seems to me that it could be helpful in threads of this type to specify where the anchored vessel is located. Not that much trouble to type in your post.

Thanks

[Steadman Uhlich]

Tandem anchoring was mentioned earlier.

I don't claim to have anywhere near the experience of some members here, whose experienced views I do value. So, I am not offering my opinion on what is the best anchor or method.

But anchors are a debatable subject, often with opinions that are formed by imperfect observations in uncontrolled testing or simply anecdotes passed on, when the anchorage conditions may be highly variable. I am no anchor expert, but here are the words of a real one you might want to consider:

Alain Poiraud, French designer of the Spade anchor, dislikes the concept of tandem anchoring and relates his experiences as follows:

“Attaching two anchors to one rode, known as tandem anchoring, should be avoided.

“The double approach attaches a second anchor with around 15′ of chain in front of the first anchor. I personally almost lost my boat trying out this idea. At the time, my first anchor dragged. Needless to say, it was an old generation model, so I decided to try something new. I added a smaller anchor in front of the large one. This worsened the holding power as opposed to doubling it, drifting swiftly on the smaller anchor while the larger one couldn’t grip at all.

“When an anchor has dragged, a trench formed behind it and this quickly backfilled with loose un-compacted sand. These areas can be still visible after several tides and may explain why some popular anchorages are criss-crossed with patches of poor holding. Then, if the most proximal anchor set, they are very good chances that the [far] anchor will fall down in this loose bottom, with, as a consequence, a poor holding!

“I have done a series of approximately 70 tandem anchorages in the clear waters of the Med, diving on nearly all of them. In 62% of the cases, only one anchor was set. During bad weather, you will not have the possibility to dive to check your anchors, and you only have to ‘trust’ your anchors, which is what I call ‘the Russian Roulette’ anchoring.

“At first, I tried to attach the smallest flat anchor (a 16 kg Brittany) with 5 meters of chain to the hole at the back of the shank of the CQR (20 kg), and I noticed that it will more or less change the equilibrium of the CQR."

--------------

I started a thread that contains more about tandem anchoring, with a lengthy excerpt from Peter Smith, the designer of the Rocna anchors. In it he also addresses the Bahamian Moor method. Here is a link to that thread:

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/...86#post2202486