Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

[congo]

doubleWhisky,

Thanks for your reply,yes well Iwill have some recovery time to contend with myself for quite some time shortly, so I know where your coming from, my time away over the next three weeks on the water will certainly be cherished.

All the best.

Regards Rex.

[estarzinger]

With regard to the thread topic . . . one thing I found interesting in Double Whisky's (which is roughly the same size as Hawk) very excellent post(s) is that it seems Hawk's anchors are in fact now 'right sized'. . . . . With Rocna telling him 50kg for high latitudes and Ray saying 50kg generally. I thought when I bought them they were "BIB" and wonder if the MFG's have subsequently upsized the charts. I do know that Peter Smith later experienced patagonia first hand, and Manson asked me for some input on sizing (when I was talking to them about the Boss and said I thought their sizes were '40kts sizes' and were perhaps small for 60kts).

It's also a bit odd/interesting that the recommended size (and what I actually ended up with) for the Ray and the Rocna are the same, if you in fact 'believe' the rocna is vastly superior. Note . . . . in patagonia, I did in fact try a size smaller next gen anchor before getting the rocna and concluded that I did in fact need 50kg (equal to the bruce I was using at the time).

I wish we had some real science to apply to these questions. But after reading a bunch of anchor tests, and conducting my own, I have concluded it is beyond the capability of even both the 'talented amateur' and the 'class/certification societies' . We need someone like the naval academy to do a graduate project . . .but unfortunately none of those type folks (I have in fact asked the US naval academy) are interested enough in small yacht anchors (and ship anchors are a whole different game).

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

With regard to the thread topic . . . one thing I found interesting in Double Whisky's (which is roughly the same size as Hawk) post is that it seems Hawk's anchors are in fact now 'right sized'. . . . . With Rocna telling him 50kg for high latitudes and Ray saying 50kg generally. I thought when I bought them they were "BIB" and wonder if the MFG's have subsequently upsized the charts. I do know that Peter Smith later experienced Patagonia first hand, and Manson asked me for some input on sizing (when I was talking to them about the Boss and said I thought their sizes were '40kts sizes' and were perhaps small for 60kts).

Nice to hear from You
In the matter of fact my boat is about 25 % heavier than Yours, but on the other hand we are generally quite lightly loaded, so difference in fully loaded weight is probably somewhat smaller. Mine is also longer a little over 10%

Generally such difference goes with the difference of one size in anchor sizing charts.

Rocna sizing chart did not change for the last five years, I’m pretty sure. They advised me to consider 55 kG if I do expect anchoring in 60+ kts sustained. It does not mean high latitudes necessarily. When corresponding with them I made it clear, that I’m not into high latitude adventure and that (as opposite to You) I do own “non high latitude” boat. I remember that they mentioned that for such a sailing one size bigger (70 kG) should be advisable. I don’t remember the wording (it was of no big interest for me that time). Tried to go through emails from that time, but I apparently got them deleted. It was only mention of a kind, regarding that it’s good for me not to go high, as for 70 kG Rocna I would definitely need to rebuilt all bow arrangement – or something to that effect. Anyway I was left with understanding that for the boat of the size of mine, cruising in high latitudes 70 kG would be proper one.
If remember this right – and most probably I do – their position was like:
· You want to cruise in normal conditions go with the chart
· You expect to anchor in violent storm go size +1
· You want to fraternize with penguins go size +2
Accordingly to this philosophy Rocna 55 would be proper for Your boat – even going high.
By the way Mantus presents similar philosophy in its sizing charts, only one step down – lunch hook, cruise (or work) anchor, violent storm anchor. Logically penguins should be presented the beast one size bigger…

Ray – in the matter of fact – advise in the chart 35 kG for my boat. The 50 kG is chart sizing for Lewmar Claw.
It is a little strange for me, as they are of similar construction, even if Ray from photos and sketches look – let’s say – somewhat more convincingly for me than Claw, but I should not comment on this, as I never used this kind of anchor (even if I think quietly, that damn thing can do something good on the weedy seabed)
May it be, that Manson sizes Ray as a part of older style two anchor arrangement? Or is selling this type mainly as a lunch hook?
If so, the 50 kG should be the proper size for my boat (exactly as a chart recommendation for Claw), 65 kG for violent storm emergency anchoring and 80 kG for visiting penguins in their nests.
One size down it gives respectably 40, 50 and 65 kG for Your boat.

Anyway, it does not look to me that Your anchors are overspecced. Just the case of big, quite heavy boat, cruising high, with reasonable safety margin.

By the way – I’m not into the BIB way of thinking. Rather BID – Big Is Difficult (to place, to handle and so on). Just want to have reasonable anchoring arrangement on the boat four times heavier than JonJo’s catamaran and with probably ten time more of hull wet area + ballast area. This last thing was not considered in earlier posts, and I do believe it is the important factor. Hull and appendages wet area is probably in some proportion to the energy absorbed by boat from the pressure of the waves. This energy must be – together with wind pressure – compensated by an anchor. This energy is huge, so I do think, that for heavier boats, with bigger wet area, the weight is of primary concern regarding anchor sizing.
And I do have only one heavy, curvy thing hanging on the bow ready to drop. Second thing like this I can use only in calm weather, or accepting substantial risk. So even if I’m rather BID in my thinking, I do rather prefer to have something overspecced gear on the bow, rather than underspecced. And it is not BIB way of thinking. Big Is Difficult But Sometime Necessary. My English is not good enough to find the wording to this effect getting a nice acronym – sorry.

Regards

Tomasz

[hpeer]

By the way Mantus presents similar philosophy in its sizing charts, only one step down – lunch hook, cruise (or work) anchor, violent storm anchor. Logically penguins should be presented the beast one size bigger…

That's precisely how I got to my (125lb/56kg) Mantus anchor. Penguin size. If Labrador counts as penguin country for talking purposes here.

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by hpeer

That's precisely how I got to my (125lb/56kg) Mantus anchor. Penguin size. If Labrador counts as penguin country for talking purposes here.

Hmmm….
Labrador?????
May be You should think really BIG???
Something good for penguins may be tiny for polar bears….

[JonJo]

We have penguins in Sydney, we see them regularly. There is a colony only 2nm from our cat, they swim down and fish round our moored yacht.

Now, do I really need to start looking a t a bigger winch etc etc

Jonathan

[JonJo]

Vessels in Survey need carry an anchor (or 2?). The anchors can be chosen on the basis of the USL codes and for a specific sized vessel a specific sized Classification Society (CS) approved HHP anchor could be chosen. New builds constructors, and their customers, are quite enthusiastic of SHHP anchors as if you size the anchor on the basis of an HHP anchor from the USL codes then an SHHP anchor can be chosen of a smaller size, weight (I think 2/3rds, I stand to be corrected). The enthusiasm is based on the idea that a smaller anchor needs a lighter deck construction, smaller windlass and, maybe, smaller chain (do not know about the last). I vaguely recall there was a similar motivation in the choice of the Fortress for the large US navy/coastguard vessel - do not recall who was the customer, where the use of the large alloy anchor, CS approved, was part motivated to keep weight (in total) down. I'm not sure how the CS equate a alloy anchor against the more common steel norm.

As an aside - it is interesting that this trend has developed (smaller, lighter, better anchor) as a weight saving focus but that this same segment of the industry has not adopted, or not that I am aware, the use of G7 chain (which offers much bigger weight savings).

And to pre-empt the comment - naval vessels dragging their anchors are not a good advertisment so I'm not convinced that their having big crews with someone on anchor watch is totally valid and most 100' vessels in survey would have a professional crew of 2 - hardly enough to mount a 24 hour anchor watch. I'm just guessing but when the weather closes in I suspect they do what we do - use a GPS derived anchor watch (or move to somewhere more sheltered).

When researching the use of Fortress in the Vendee at Auckland Island, 2008 and 2012, I came across a NZ Navy report on their anchoring in the same location as the 2 Vendee yachts. Strong winds were expected and HMNZS Canterbury deployed both her primary and secondary anchors (I think they are both the same size) simultaneously for the first time in a 'V' formation.

Jonathan

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by JonJo

We have penguins in Sydney, we see them regularly. There is a colony only 2nm from our cat, they swim down and fish round our moored yacht.
Now, do I really need to start looking at a bigger winch etc etc

Originally Posted by JonJo

Jonathan

Hello!

I do not think You are in a need of an upgrade!!!!
If I understood properly You have on board at least two steel anchors of new generation, sized accordingly to the manufacturers sizing charts.
Additionally You have some combination of aluminium stuff.
Sailing on cat the possibility of using two new gen anchors for double anchoring is real possibility.

I have on board one new gen anchor sized “by the book” and only aluminium as backup, as using two new gen anchors for double anchoring is rather difficult to manage on my boat, and this is true for 90 or 95 or may be 99 % of contemporary monohulls.

You have double “normal conditions” weight of steel on board

If I had upgrade to “penguin level” I would have 175 % of present steel.

For me You are already well into “penguin envelope” – I do not even consider this!

By the way – please pass my greets to the penguins near You.
But penguin sized anchor is intended to visit their nests in Antarctic.
By monohull.
Cat with two standard sized anchors should do also.



Tomasz

[estarzinger]

by the way . . . polar bears are much more fun

[JonJo]

Originally Posted by estarzinger

by the way . . . polar bears are much more fun

We make up for the absence of polar bears with salt water crocodiles, ravenous sharks and dingoes - but not usually all at once.

Jonathan

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by JonJo

We make up for the absence of polar bears with salt water crocodiles, ravenous sharks and dingoes - but not usually all at once.

Jonathan

You wrote something about lack of sense of humour in anchor threads???

[downunder]

Originally Posted by JonJo

We make up for the absence of polar bears with salt water crocodiles, ravenous sharks and dingoes - but not usually all at once.

Jonathan

And the anways shark infested waters. Do also keep a lookout for those killer stingers and the odd stingray.

[JonJo]

Our biggest fear are whales. Not my best image, but we were a bit startled and being of a rather cautious nature I almost dropped the camera a few seconds later.

This one passed directly under the boat sufficiently close we could see her directly underneath.

[Cotemar]

Originally Posted by JonJo

Our biggest fear are whales. Not my best image, but we were a bit startled and being of a rather cautious nature I almost dropped the camera a few seconds later.

This one passed directly under the boat sufficiently close we could see her directly underneath.

Looks like she was looking right at you. Very Cool.

Sometimes these sighting are really cool and other time they are really scary.

We had a very cool sighting of a pod of around 100 dolphin pass in front of us last year off Montauk long Island last year. We dowsed the sails and sat there for half an hour watching them go by in front of us.

[hpeer]

Breaching humpbacks is pretty common around NL. It can also be a bit intimidating.

I got all confused in my eyeball nav one day, damn sunker where it should not have been. Until they woke and swam off.

From the dictionary of Newfoundland English

sunker n also sunker rock DC ~ Nfld (1955-) for sense 1.
1 A submerged rock over which the sea breaks; familiar form of SUNKEN ROCK; BREAKER; GROUNDER.