Anchoring with an electric windlass

[thinwater]

Power down. But I almost never deploy more than 75' of chain, since I cruise shallow waters and draw 3'.

As for battery and wear, though, I imagine that motor amps down are tiny and wear is little different than dropping. Low load.

[Symphony]

slightly off-topic but I just finished installing a new relay for my Lewmar V2 which I purchased in June 2013. the original relay lasted only 2 seasons! the foot switches also gave up the ghost after only 2 seasons. the axle holding the pawl lasted one season! This windlass got used, but not heavily. 12 times per month during the summer. the motor still pulls well, incredibly powerful but overall I will never buy another Lewmar windlass.

[Mithril Bham]

Done both. Sometimes hard to keep the chain under control using the gravity method. Use the power down almost always. Start the engine first.

[knockabout]

whatever works for you / in current or wind wait for the weight of the boat to straighten out the pile up and pull the anchor in then let out a little bit more / wait till you are sure it's holding / electric winches take the work out of pulling up large anchors and 100's of feet of 1/2inch chain etc / always make sure the anchor pulls in regardless of which drop method you use / congratulations on 55years of cruising / did you get a gold towelling hat

[Pelagic]

Standard operating procedures for large ships is to power out close to waterline then declutch and release by controlled brake during anchoring.

It is for the same safety reasons that the bitter end of the chain is made fast to ship by a 'Weak Link', so that it will break and run overboard as opposed to snapping chain with the risk of injury.

[Fuss]

one day you might have an emergency,

for example, there's a very strong wind and the rocks are very close, we won't discuss how you got in this situation but you need to drop the anchor NOW to save the boat.
So what are you going to do... motor it down nice and easy so it doesn't get tangled and it comes out of the locker nicely and does not jam in the spill pipe because maybe the pile fell over a bit and jammed some of the chain ... then let it settle and then gradually and slowly apply pressure so it has a chance to dig in and does not skip over the surface..... because as we all learnt on here... that's the good way to anchor right?

or are you going to release the clutch fully, dump the anchor and play out 80 to 100 meters, then take the load off the windlass gypsy and wait for the anchor to bite hard and bring the bow into the wind.

well .... that's probably the anchoring technique you're going to try to use to save your boat in a critical situation.

so, you might as well use it all the time to stay fit for this moment that hopefully never comes.

and forget all the nice and slow and let it settle methods.



Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[Omatako]

We use free spooling to deploy and once the anchor is set we "motor" out what is needed to give effect to the snubber.

When weighing the anchor, I run the engine, pull up the catenary then stop. The weight of the chain pulls the boat forward as a new catenary is created. Repeat until the bow is over the anchor at which point the forward motion of the boat lifts the anchor out of the bottom. Pulling the anchor/chain up is then a light-weight task.

I do this not to save the windlass but to not abuse the battery. High energy levels hauling the chain means high energy levels leaving the battery.

One of the earlier posts in this thread piqued my interest. Why do some sailors choose to anchor in deep water? Not a criticism, just wondering. I often see, even in uncrowded anchorages, boats anchoring in 10 metres or more with a tidal shift of maybe two metres. I always estimate the tide and then anchor in water deep enough to leave just a metre under the keel. Simplifies anchoring and makes recovering the anchor a breeze. I've never been able to see benefit of anchoring deeper than that. Am I missing something?

[Cheechako]

Originally Posted by Omatako

We use free spooling to deploy and once the anchor is set we "motor" out what is needed to give effect to the snubber.

When weighing the anchor, I run the engine, pull up the catenary then stop. The weight of the chain pulls the boat forward as a new catenary is created. Repeat until the bow is over the anchor at which point the forward motion of the boat lifts the anchor out of the bottom. Pulling the anchor/chain up is then a light-weight task.

I do this not to save the windlass but to not abuse the battery. High energy levels hauling the chain means high energy levels leaving the battery.

One of the earlier posts in this thread piqued my interest. Why do some sailors choose to anchor in deep water? Not a criticism, just wondering. I often see, even in uncrowded anchorages, boats anchoring in 10 metres or more with a tidal shift of maybe two metres. I always estimate the tide and then anchor in water deep enough to leave just a metre under the keel. Simplifies anchoring and makes recovering the anchor a breeze. I've never been able to see benefit of anchoring deeper than that. Am I missing something?

While not always the reason, one reason would be as protection from a major windshift/ midnite chubasco. One meter under the keel 100 ft from shore may be fine until the wind shifts blowing into the bay at 40-50 mph. Then you are near or on the beach very quickly.

[Jim Cate]

One of the earlier posts in this thread piqued my interest. Why do some sailors choose to anchor in deep water? Not a criticism, just wondering. I often see, even in uncrowded anchorages, boats anchoring in 10 metres or more with a tidal shift of maybe two metres. I always estimate the tide and then anchor in water deep enough to leave just a metre under the keel. Simplifies anchoring and makes recovering the anchor a breeze. I've never been able to see benefit of anchoring deeper than that. Am I missing something?

A couple of comments on this

As Cheech says above, the primary reason is to assure clearance in the event of a major wind shift, with a little extra added i n in case the anchor trips and takes a bit to re-set. And if the wind really pipes up and a swell develops, that metre of clearance can disappear and you start bumping in between the peaks. And, how do you know without a lot of exploration that there are not rocks or other lumps that stick up more than a metre above the bottom plane within your swinging circle?

And then in many areas there are mozzies nearer the beach, and in some of those areas ,said mozzies carry very unpleasant diseases,

And IME, it is often crowded in close to the beach, and the crowds are populated with the less experienced sailors w ho are more likely to drag or have other misadventures.

In places with bistros and clubs ashore, it is noisier near the shore.

The catenary from the chain gives better energy absorbtion when the depth is greater.

On a personal note, we spent three summers in NZ, and noticed that the Kiwis often anchored very close in to shore. They often commented that we Yanks anchored "way too far out" and used "way too much chain". Maybe it is a cultural difference!

Jim

[Pelagic]

what Jim said...plus the fishing is usually better

[Alan Mighty]

Originally Posted by Omatako

One of the earlier posts in this thread piqued my interest. Why do some sailors choose to anchor in deep water? Not a criticism, just wondering. I often see, even in uncrowded anchorages, boats anchoring in 10 metres or more with a tidal shift of maybe two metres. I always estimate the tide and then anchor in water deep enough to leave just a metre under the keel. Simplifies anchoring and makes recovering the anchor a breeze. I've never been able to see benefit of anchoring deeper than that. Am I missing something?

Every situation has unknown unknowns and known unknowns, Andre. Those are all too easily missed because we tend to focus on the knowns.


I would guess that cruisers in NZ, being part of the so-called Pacific 'Ring of Fire' are familiar with the Nihongo (aka Japanese) word 津波 tsunami, no?.


The chance of a tsunami in a particular place is a known unknown.


We had our boat, Led Myne, in the northern part of the Selatan Melaka (Malacca Straits) on 26 December 2004. We were on the coast of Malaysia.


In the weeks after the event, the lessons were clear:


* cruisers in well-enclosed marinas (those with only one or two entrances) had real problems; cruisers in open marinas (i.e. ones with only a wave-reduction wall or with no seawall) had no problems.


* cruisers anchored up creeks and rivers generally had no problems, as long as their anchor held and no big flotsam (barges, trees) drifted and collided with them.


* cruisers anchored in close (hard to give a definite figure of 'close' but let's say 4 - 5 metres of water depth or less at mid-tide) had problems, some small, some large; cruisers anchored in 8 m of water had no problems (other than the risk from big flotsam).


In hindsight, everyone nodded approvingly at the oral histories of the indigenous people of maritime SE Asia (and Nippon) who all said their ancestors insisted on only living in villages hundreds of metres back from the shore and elevated above sea level. In tectonically quiescent centuries, under the influence of economic demands, people settled the coastal plains (of Fukushima province, of Aceh province, and so on).


Too easy to miss the known unknowns (and to turn them into forgotten unknowns or unknown unknowns)

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Fuss

then let it settle and then gradually and slowly apply pressure so it has a chance to dig in and does not skip over the surface..... because as we all learnt on here... that's the good way to anchor right?

You have raised an important point that the anchor is a valuable piece of safety gear.

The situation you have described is very real.

I agree that releasing the clutch to allow the anchor to free fall to the bottom is how I would drop the anchor in this emergency, so practicing this is a good idea (it is what I do most of the time anyway). However, I would make the point that it is possible to "feather" or progressively tighten the clutch on the windlass to achieve a gradual increase in force on the anchor even in the situation you describe. This makes life easier for the anchor. The anchor will set more reliably. With this type of emergency it is vital the anchor sets the first time.

If you want to practice for this emergency, then that is the technique I would use. Learn to adjust the clutch to achieve a progressive increase in force on the anchor. It will also set your anchor reliably for everyday use.

Of course in an emergency, as you describe, it may not be possible to do the above ideal method. You may have to delegate the dropping of the anchor to an inexperienced crew member, for example. In most cases if you have a good modern anchor and if the substrate is reasonable the "dump all the chain and hope" technique will work fine. The anchor should still set well despite the abuse, but it is not ideal and not something I would deliberately practice.

[Omatako]

Hey Jim

Thanks for the considered opinion below. I have heard much of this in discussion and perhaps you're right, maybe it's our surroundings or a cultural thing. Some comments below:

Originally Posted by Jim Cate

A couple of comments on this

As Cheech says above, the primary reason is to assure clearance in the event of a major wind shift, with a little extra added i n in case the anchor trips and takes a bit to re-set. And if the wind really pipes up and a swell develops, that metre of clearance can disappear and you start bumping in between the peaks. And, how do you know without a lot of exploration that there are not rocks or other lumps that stick up more than a metre above the bottom plane within your swinging circle? We rarely anchor in roadsteads but very predominantly in enclosed bays with good protection. A major wind shift with stronger wind and a swell implies a lee shore. So if those conditions developed, I would in any case be gone. And shallower anchoring means a short swing and the area to explore is not big at all. Also without exploration, how do you know there isn't a rocky peak sticking up 8 metres off the bottom plane?

And then in many areas there are mozzies nearer the beach, and in some of those areas ,said mozzies carry very unpleasant diseases,Happily not where I live/sail

And IME, it is often crowded in close to the beach, and the crowds are populated with the less experienced sailors w ho are more likely to drag or have other misadventures.IME the inexperienced generally prefer to stay in the deeper water. Here, mostly the little fizz boats anchor close in but they're almost on the beach. But you're right, it does get busier closer in.

In places with bistros and clubs ashore, it is noisier near the shore.Places like that on anchorages don't exist in NZ

The catenary from the chain gives better energy absorbtion when the depth is greater.Good point, can't argue with that. But it does sort of get back to your first point - if I need energy absorption I'd be moving anyway.

On a personal note, we spent three summers in NZ, and noticed that the Kiwis often anchored very close in to shore. They often commented that we Yanks anchored "way too far out" and used "way too much chain". Maybe it is a cultural difference!

Jim

I guess my anchoring habits are more suitable for my area of sailing and some of the points you raise may be well prevalent in other, less pristine environments. But I have cruised to places like Mozambique, Madagascar, Zanzibar, Seychelles and a range of island groups in the Pacific and have yet to find cause to change my habits.

[Jim Cate]

I guess my anchoring habits are more suitable for my area of sailing and some of the points you raise may be well prevalent in other, less pristine environments. But I have cruised to places like Mozambique, Madagascar, Zanzibar, Seychelles and a range of island groups in the Pacific and have yet to find cause to change my habits.

G'Day Andre,

Looks like your habits are pretty well ingrained, and if it works for you, that's great.

But I'm surprised that in your African and Pacific Island anchorages you were not concerned about mozzie-borne disease. We've not done any African travel, but I was of the opinion that Malaria and other diseases were common there. I'm quite sure that in the Pacific, the Solomons in particular are ridden with Malaria, and Dengue is endemic in several other groups. That in itself is cause for us to anchor well out from shore when cruising those places. We've seen too many fellow yotties fall prey to nasty ailments in those venues.

And as to never anchoring in places where a swell can develop, or at least having the option to move to a better anchorage... well, the Bay of Islands does offer lots of great anchorages, pretty close to each other, but in many cruising grounds the choices are more limited, and moving in the dark is risky.

I agree that one develops habits that reflect local conditions, but in the general cruising world I think a more generalized practice is better... my answer to your question about "what am I missing".

Cheers,

Jim

[roverhi]

Power down with the windlass. If I let the anchor free fall with the vertical windlass, the centrifugal force with the chain doing a 180 racing around the gypsy causes the chain to lift outward and jam. No problem with powering it down.

Would be nice to let the anchor free fall in deep water to get to the bottom quickly. If I think of it, let out a good chunk of chain before getting to the selected anchor position so it doesn't take so long to get to the bottom.