Anchoring Perfectionism vs Realities of Soft Mud

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Fortress are the only anchor manufacturer (that I know of) that recommend setting of two anchors in changing wind, but for some unfathonable reason those that point out the fundamental reasons for this limitation are accused of "disparaging" the product rather than simply recognising its inherent advantages and drawbacks.

Yes. Perhaps I am the only one here extolling the virtues of two (big/adequate) lighter Fortress/Danforth anchors bow and stern vs. one heavy NG off the bow.. if you haven't tried it, don't knock it. I always sleep well.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Don C L

Yes. Perhaps I am the only one here extolling the virtues of two (big/adequate) lighter Fortress/Danforth anchors bow and stern vs. one heavy NG off the bow.. if you haven't tried it, don't knock it. I always sleep well.

I would not do it bow and stern -- you can get a force multiplication which could pull the anchor out, and also you might end up broadside to shifted wind.

If you're going to use two anchors, I would do a Bahamian moor.

I hate anchoring with two anchors in tidal waters because of the inevitable tangles, which I think also create a risk of tripping the anchors out.

[Fortress]

Noelex, the issue I have is with you constantly posting the same critical information about our product whereby you are using one or two cases as the sole basis for your opinion. In each case, there was Fortress model which was 10 lb (4.5 kg) or less, and the anchor was clearly undersized for the boat and conditions, but that possibility is never mentioned.

You have done this repeatedly in numerous anchor threads, and additionally, all evidence that is presented, even by boaters who have had positive experiences with a Fortress during wind shifts, is routinely ignored.


Regarding the late founder of our company, yes he was a very adventurous boater as he once took a boat 1,000 miles up the Amazon River, he crossed the Atlantic Ocean several times, and he completed a circumnavigation in his early 70s.

He stated once that when an anchor breaks free from a sea bottom, it is possible that it is no longer an anchor with sharp edges in which to re-penetrate the bottom....it is a ball of sediment that has to be cleaned away first before the anchor can function again.

This is why he recommended, as noted in our Safe Anchoring Guide which is included with every anchor, that for maximum safety two anchors should be set if a wind or tidal shift is likely.

This solid advice is not an acknowledgement that the Fortress is more prone to break free during this occurrence, it is a good safety measure for any anchor or situation.


Steve, as you know from our discussions, I don't think that testing a 10 lb Fortress in those conditions and comparing it to the performance of steel anchors, which weigh 2-4x more, and then drawing a firm conclusion about our entire anchor product line is fair or reasonable.

[Panope]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

There are two or three places in the Solent where I anchor frequently, which have soft, soupy mud. The tide runs up to 3 or 4 knots and changes every 6 1/2 hours, so any overnight anchoring is necessarily going to involve a 180 degree change of pull.

I have anchored overnight many times with Rocna, Spade, and Fortress.

Of these three, the Fortress sets by far the best in the really soft mud. The Spade is much worse than that, and the Rocna a distant third. The Rocna was particularly prone to clogging, so the slightest mistake with backing down too fast in even slightly soft mud, and it would turn into a ball of mud with no holding power.

None of the three anchors ever dragged in my experience.

That doesn't prove anything, but it's another data point.

Dockhead, that is a pretty good test. However, at least on my boat, 3 or 4 knots of current is equal to ONLY about 15 (maybe 20) knots of wind. I think this may be insufficient to actually rotate a well set anchor.

Maybe give your Fortress a strong engine pull in opposite direction of the ORIGINAL set. Better yet, let your boat build up some speed and give it the real acid test

Steve

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

I would not do it bow and stern -- you can get a force multiplication which could pull the anchor out, and also you might end up broadside to shifted wind.

If you're going to use two anchors, I would do a Bahamian moor.

I hate anchoring with two anchors in tidal waters because of the inevitable tangles, which I think also create a risk of tripping the anchors out.

Well I would say that if you are worried about one anchor pulling the other one out, one of those anchors is either not set or too small. And for me when I get a breeze or current come up at night on my beam I may get up and bring the stern rode to the bow, depending on how hard the pull is and how sleepy I am. I completely understand the concern about possibility of tangling in a tidal channel. Nothing's perfect. But I am not sure I understand how one anchor will trip up the other unless one drags a very long way.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Panope

Dockhead, that is a pretty good test. However, at least on my boat, 3 or 4 knots of current is equal to ONLY about 15 (maybe 20) knots of wind. I think this may be insufficient to actually rotate a well set anchor.

Maybe give your Fortress a strong engine pull in opposite direction of the ORIGINAL set. Better yet, let your boat build up some speed and give it the real acid test

Steve

Yes, that's a good point. I don't remember where I read it, but it's said that current is no test of an anchor at all, and that corresponds to my experience. It's wind and waves that is a real test.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Don C L

. . . But I am not sure I understand how one anchor will trip up the other unless one drags a very long way.

An anchor can be tripped out if a pull is put on the shank in the wrong direction. In fact that's how we recover our anchors. If the rodes are tangled, there's no telling what direction a pull can be put on it.

It's just my subjective opinion, but using multiple anchors for me is nasty, complicated, and rife with failure modes. I'd much rather have one good, very large anchor really well set. I might make an exception in case of some bottom so soft that I can't get anything to set, and don't trust any anchor to reset, but in that case I would first start looking for a different spot.

[Panope]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Yes, that's a good point. I don't remember where I read it, but it's said that current is no test of an anchor at all, and that corresponds to my experience. It's wind and waves that is a real test.

An easy comparison of current and wind pressure can be made by noting how fast your boat sails under bare poles. For me, I get 3 or 4 knots of boat speed at less that 20 knots of wind. At 40 knots, (DDW, bare poles) I get 6 knots.

Steve

[Stumble]

Originally Posted by Panope

I agree with the above.

However, after the anchor has broken free of the seabed (and ALL anchors can break free), The Fortress anchor is less likely to re-set than certain other anchors. I have confirmed this with numerous visual tests in FIRM SUBSUBSTRAITS.

But, the anchors that re-set perfectly in firm substraits may have trouble setting at all in the soupy stuff. This is where a Fortress anchor is likely a better choice.

I wish someone who lives in an area with soupy mud (like Chesapeake) would conduct simple 180 degree reversal tests with a fortress anchor against a popular NG anchor using a normal cruising boat. My guess is that neither one will be perfect but the Fortress will be better.

Steve

If we could get the manufacturers on board I would happily volunteer my boat and time to do some serious testing in New Orleans. Lake Pontchertrain is actually a good spot to test for mud, because the bottom is uniformly flat, soupy, and has almost no sand/clay. It's also reasonably shallow (12-14' across the entire thing). All I need is a load cell and a bunch of anchors.

I would recommend the manufacturers recommended anchor for a 40' sailboat be the test anchor, regardless of anchor size or weight.

The test boat should be able to break free almost any anchor specced for a 40' boat without trouble (60' power boat with twin 450hp diesels). If it can't... Well that anchor wins.

[Panope]

Originally Posted by Stumble

If we could get the manufacturers on board I would happily volunteer my boat and time to do some serious testing in New Orleans. Lake Pontchertrain is actually a good spot to test for mud, because the bottom is uniformly flat, soupy, and has almost no sand/clay. It's also reasonably shallow (12-14' across the entire thing). All I need is a load cell and a bunch of anchors.

I would recommend the manufacturers recommended anchor for a 40' sailboat be the test anchor, regardless of anchor size or weight.

The test boat should be able to break free almost any anchor specced for a 40' boat without trouble (60' power boat with twin 450hp diesels). If it can't... Well that anchor wins.

Sounds good, Greg. But i think the thing that is keeping folks awake at night is not so much ultimate holding power, but how the anchor handles re-set/rotating during the wind shifts.

I personally would sleep better with a moderate holding power anchor that re-sets perfectly, than with a super-duper high holding power anchor that cannot handle re-sets.

Steve

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

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.

First, let me say I do not use 2 anchors unless I am in a very tight place (canal or narrow creek) or if the mud is pudding. One anchor is best.

The solution is to have only one rode. Set the second using a fixed length of about 50-100 feet (I extend this to apply setting force), and then join that to the primary with a soft shackle or similar. No tangles (I'm in a tidal area).

[Don C L]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

An anchor can be tripped out if a pull is put on the shank in the wrong direction. In fact that's how we recover our anchors. If the rodes are tangled, there's no telling what direction a pull can be put on it.

It's just my subjective opinion, but using multiple anchors for me is nasty, complicated, and rife with failure modes. I'd much rather have one good, very large anchor really well set. I might make an exception in case of some bottom so soft that I can't get anything to set, and don't trust any anchor to reset, but in that case I would first start looking for a different spot.

OH, ok, I am picturing anchors set at 180 degrees to each other. Going with one big NG one is fine if you can swing of course. I was just saying that since you did point out the virtues of the Fortress setting and holding in mud, the solution to its weakness is to set two at 180 degrees to each other.

[chris95040]

Originally Posted by Panope

Sounds good, Greg. But i think the thing that is keeping folks awake at night is not so much ultimate holding power, but how the anchor handles re-set/rotating during the wind shifts.

I personally would sleep better with a moderate holding power anchor that re-sets perfectly, than with a super-duper high holding power anchor that cannot handle re-sets.

Steve

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Steady Hand

.... 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:

Tandem Anchoring - Cruisers & Sailing Forums

I suppose you have noticed that no one agrees with Peter. I wonder what folks think about that. He's a smart guy.

[Juho]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

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.

How about dropping one anchor from the bow and one from the rear. No spinning, no tangling, I hope.