The Delta Failed us Again.

[DoubleWhisky]

Originally Posted by jeepbluetj

There's all kinds of info on the thread already, but I have indeed anchored there several times so I'll add some local info for the rest of y'all.

Why 3:1? this is a very small anchorage - not alot of room at all. So it's generally always short. It's also inside the breakwater.

Was winter, so I was the only boat there, and used a CQR copy with about 4:1 scope, maybe a bit more. Didn't drag. But I've got a whole lot less boat than the OP.

Using two anchors would give you much more stress on the anchor from the current. Wind is usually quite negligible there at night, and there are no waves - it's inside the harbor. So the biggest factor IMHO is current. anchoring parallel to the breakwater (the one that runs to the beach - behind the baitbarge) may give less stress on the tackle due to current (and wind) - but most folks face stern-to that breakwater.

The bottom is best described as trash-laden goo. It's soft mud with junk in it.

There is another designated anchorage outside the harbor (towards Doheny - by the inlet) that is undoubtedly quite rolly, but is generally empty enough to let out lots of rode. (I've never anchored there)

And of course, there's guest slips over on the west end - except this weekend because of the boat show.

Just being corious - isn't it possible to moor Med style, with the lines to the breakwater and, may be, with the second anchor set, up the current?

[jeepbluetj]

I've never seen anybody do that (med moorl). This is always a mild anchorage. If it got really windy you could always tie up at the fuel dock or the bait barge for a bit

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Unfortunately particular anchorages often limit the maximum scope that can be used. (This can vary depending on the wind direction, other boats etc)
This is not a problem that is related to new generation anchors, but has been a difficulty that has always faced cruising sailors.

You can, and should, reject some anchorages because the maximum possible scope is inadequate for the conditions, but too much caution and you will miss out on some great spots.

I believe the golf term is "play it as it lays"...so I concur. While I don't want to miss out on great spots, spots aren't great if they are stuffed with short-scope anchored boats and there's current, weather or other impediments to a restful sleep.

[Jim Cate]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Unfortunately particular anchorages often limit the maximum scope that can be used. (This can vary depending on the wind direction, other boats etc)
This is not a problem that is related to new generation anchors, but has been a difficulty that has always faced cruising sailors.

You can, and should, reject some anchorages because the maximum possible scope is inadequate for the conditions, but too much caution and you will miss out on some great spots.

This brutal fact of cruising (sometimes you must anchor using less scope than you would like) is one good reason to have a bigger-is-better anchor!

Jim

[Tayana42]

Thanks everyone for your constructive comments and suggestions. I am now convinced I needed more scope (despite the tight space in the anchorage) and a bigger anchor. As long as I'm upgrading I will go to a next-generation anchor. Since it seems that the manufacturers' recommendations understate the appropriate size, what do you recommend for my Tayana V 42, 30,000 lbs nominal weight? I'm not yet decided between Rocha, Mantus Supreme, Ultra or Spade (Excel and Super Sarca not unavailable in the USA). I'm not asking which anchor to buy just what size. I have 300 ft of 3/8 inch G43 chain which fits my windlass (Vetus/ Lofrans Tigres) and several snubbers up to 40 ft. We will be cruising Southern California this year and Mexico next year. You have convinced me that Bigger is Better but I don't want to weigh down the bow any more than necessary. So, what size do you recommend?

[sailorboy1]

if it was me I would be looking at 80#

[motion30]

if you think you need to 60 lb. then buy the 80lb. you will not regret it

[donradcliffe]

60# should work fine

[JPA Cate]

Don,

We're using a 60 lb. Manson Supreme for this boat, fully laden, no more than 12 tonnes. I think for his boat, 80 lb. would probably be better. But he's already made up his mind.

What he was really asking for was more information about the bottom in that particular anchorage. And only one poster responded to that part of the original post.

Ann

Ann

[MBLittle]

I always heard 1lb a foot for regular boating and one step up on the charts for cruising.

Personally I think 80lb is a bit much and I would be comfortable with 60lb.

As far as the bottom, I've never anchored that area, but grew up in San Diego and I believe you'll find mostly lose or semi-packed sand. I'd find an anchor you feel comfortable with for that bottom.

There are plenty of local cruisers that know better than I, so I may be incorrect.

Sent from my LG-E980 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[congo]

Re: The Delta Failed us Again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by congo
No mark, our origional Delta is not shamfered on the underside of the shank.

Hmm. Here is a picture of a Delta in a Yachting Monthly article that I found googling. This is what ours also looked like. I also found a review on the Delta anchor when it first came out by Charles Kanter where he mentions the shank being sharper on the bottom. The Delta Anchor times 300 (5th paragraph).

Mark
Attached Thumbnails


Well Mark now I am totally confused, I really appreciated your info, I purchased 3 different size Deltas through Muir winches over twenty years ago, no chamfer, yet those Deltas compared to the china unit from Lewmar are chalk and cheese.

Regards Rex.

[congo]

Quote:
Originally Posted by congo
Quote:
Originally Posted by colemj
I think we had an original - it was a much thinner shank and the bottom edge of the shank was actually machine sharpened.

No mark, our origional Delta is not shamfered on the underside of the shank.

And No Noelex we do not have to sharpen the underside of our anchor shanks, our anchor designs bury shank and all, if you reverse throttle at all you will not get to see the anchor.

Your float, roll bar anchors (concave ) dont need the float for the purpose you explained as they rarley will ever bury the roll bar.

In strong shifting wind and tides the rope of the float makes a very good fast anchor release system when you least of all want it to,seriously- well you may argue but we have tried your float method with a boat moored close to shore in strong wind testing an anchor, sure enough it ended up on the beach with the float rope tighly lashed around the chain.

Regards Rex

Rex, good to see you are still posting. Good points. I've yet to see a SARCA Excel here in Toronto, but maybe before we go...otherwise, I'll have to come to you. It's on our short list for a main anchor.
__________________
Can't sleep? Read www.alchemy2009.blogspot.com for fast relief. Can't read? Avoid www.volumesofsalt.blogspot.com, because it's just personal reviews of sea books.

Hi Alchemy,

Love for to you visit as you would be made most welcome, we are sending a steady stream of anchors over your way so if you are still interested then pm or email me.

Regards Rex.

[Tayana42]

As an update, thanks everyone for the input, and to Jeepbluetj for the info on Dana Point. I realize more scope would greatly increase the holding power of whatever anchor I use. No need to defend my technique in Dana Point but the space was very restricted and shared with others boats who were anchored bow and stern. Setting anchors parallel to the breakwater would have cut off the anchorage to others. Of course, it didn't work out. So now I'm upgrading. I just ordered a Rocna 33 which is 73 lbs. with 5:1 or 7:1 or greater scope this should work for me in most conditions.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[jeepbluetj]

You're welcome. Next time y'all (any CFers) are in Dana let me know. My boat's on the "fun dock" and there is always cold beverages in the fridge.

[Adventurebound]

[QUOTE=Tayana42;1553201] I just ordered a Rocna