The idea of trying to convert ideas so entrenched looks to be a complete waste of time.
So I wondered about an alternative and possibly more educational foray into anchors and
anchoring, but still focussed on the Excel.
Way back in the distant past it was suggested, on this thread, that USL practices for determining anchor weight is wrong and that anchors should be bigger than recommended (and if you read the attached link, 2 sizes bigger). If you have the time and patience you will find that the
concept (of bigger is better) did not enjoy universal support but dissent did not enjoy much support either.
I hope I have pasted the link correctly!
One Big Anchor Better Than Multiple Anchors In Almost All Situations
Simplistically the argument is that if your are to
cruise to less well frequented areas (where
anchorages are not well documented and support distant) then you should use as your primary anchor one that is 2 sizes bigger than the USL code might recommend. This recommendation is on the basis of using a modern, efficient, high holding power anchor (which happens to be a
Rocna, the same choice of anchor as the individual recommending the same course of action on this thread).
I find the
concept slightly contradictory, someone who currently uses the correct sized, say genuine Bruce or Delta, of say 20kg wants to upgrade to a better anchor. They are OKish with the
current ground tackle - but want something a bit better (and they are going to
cruise Patagonia, Tasmania,
Newfoundland or Alaska). The Delta is rated a High Holding Power anchor by Lloyds. He chooses say a Supreme, rated Super High Holding Power, by Lloyds (so 2 times as good as the same weight Delta) - but the recommendation on the basis of the link - is that he should buy a 33kg anchor (and, these are now my comments, maybe thicker link chain, a new
gypsy and a new
winch? - little point in having that extra holding capacity and a wimpy chain).
If you think I might simplify too much or be suspicious of my summary then check the link - and post a correction. I'm not inviting criticism of my summary - just a correction.
So I wonder: Of those who have Excels
1 Do you feel that the USL code recommendations (which are basically the same recommendations that all anchor makers use) are about right.
2 If you have the correct sized Excel, based on the USL codes, have you ever felt 'insecure' and if you have - what have you done about it.
3 Apart from lining the pockets of anchor, chain and
windlass suppliers are there obvious disadvantages to carry a '2 sizes bigger' anchor (given that the anchor is not significant compared to the weight of chain).
It would be interesting if anyone who posts mentions their vessel type, size and weight and size of anchor.
We have mentioned it previously but we have a 38' cat, 6t cruising weight, 16kg Excel, 8mm chain. We have deployed a second anchor
Fortress FX 23 or Spade A80 (in addition to the Excel) but primarily to stop veering in a very tight anchorage (we have also tied to trees, easier with a cat). I do
recall someone who has posted on this thread and has a sister yacht to ours carries a 13kg Excel (and we used a 13kg Excel without problems - but only locally and not under Gale or Storm force winds).
Finally, the results have not been published (so minimal detail) but an anchor maker, not AR, tested one of their modern 15kg anchors recently using a 90t tug and achieved holding capacities of 5t (they had need to upsize chain and shackles). The tests are hardly independent and the seabed was presumably chosen to prove a point - but impressive none the less.
Jon