Request for Broken Anchor Information and Photographs
posted by John & Phyllis
Web Site
Our friend Darrell Nicolson, editor at Practical Sailor, is getting ready to do some destruction testing on anchors. We think that this is a really good idea since even a great holding anchor won’t do you any good if it bends or breaks under load. Some of the new anchor designs look a bit suspect to us in this regard and so it will be great to get some hard test data on this.
As part of his project Darrell is looking for anecdotal information about, and photographs of, anchors that have broken or bent. We encourage any of our readers that have had an anchor fail structurally to send as much information as possible to Darrell at practicalsailor@belvoirpubs.com. It is always good to have real world data to back up a study like this. He asks that image files not be larger than 10mb.
While talking of Practical Sailor, we have been getting this excellent publication for 20 years or so and highly recommend it. For those of you who are not familiar with the magazine, they test and report on boats and equipment. Since they don’t accept advertising they are not subjected to leverage from manufacturers like most other sailing magazines are. For subscription information see www.practical-sailor.com. Tell them we sent you.
Disclosure: We will be writing some pieces and maybe some answers to questions for Practical Sailor, so the above plug is not totally altruistic.
Labels: Anchoring
Turning the dream into reality
posted by Colin Speedie
Web Site
Ever since I was a small child I have had a fascination with building things, or making them better – boats, cars and motorcycles have all come and gone in this manner. Some started as good basic raw material, others as well formed objects that simply needed fine tuning and affection.
And like many of us who love to sail, my ultimate dream has been to build a boat capable of going just about anywhere imagination can take me. And to my great good fortune, for the last few years I have had a partner in life (and sail) who shares that dream – so now there’s no excuse for either of us not to dream by day. So now, children grown, businesses sold, and the deposit paid, our coin is down the well.
So we now hope to distil a lifetime of sailing experience into creating a boat for 2 (+ occasional friends and family) that will be as safe and comfortable in the tropics as in the high latitudes we are more accustomed to. In my case 15 years as a sailing instructor and professional charter skipper and wildlife researcher, in Louise’s 4 years aboard our existing boat, plus a female eye for details I would undoubtedly overlook or dismiss – wrongly – as unimportant.
During my working career I skippered vessels as diverse as a sailing trawler, 72ft sail training ketch and for the last nine years a 39ft cutter. All have helped to inform our view of what will suit us. And like most sensible people we have cultivated a magpie eye for filching good ideas, so we believe that our new home will be both original and new. But as the old saying goes, all that means is that the parts that are original are not new, and the parts that are new are not original. And maybe that’s no bad thing – the sea doesn’t change, and evolution, not revolution probably makes most sense.
But what we both agree on is buy well, buy once and keep it simple. Anyone who has ever worked on even a modestly complicated charter boat knows that cheap and weak gear never lasts, always breaks at the wrong time, and that to opt for less than the best always results in a life of endless drudgery fixing/making/mending. And whilst that ability to repair is vital, constant practice doesn’t just make perfect, it can also ruin an otherwise pleasantly challenging pastime. We’d rather be cruising!
So we have taken the plunge, and our new boat has just begun to take shape. And, no, we’re not building her ourselves – we’ve both worked long and hard to get this far, and we want to get going – the clock doesn’t go backwards. But we have had the luxury of working with an Agent and Builder who are broadly sympathetic to out needs (and occasional demands!). Our choice of boat is (to some) unusual, and maybe wouldn’t be your choice either, but we hope you’ll nonetheless find it of interest to follow our trials and tribulations as ONVI 435 No 104 “Forever Changes” takes shape in the Alubat factory in Les Sables D’Olonne, France.
Over the next months we’ll be writing a regular update right up until she’s launched, and beyond. And we hope our travails may help inform you if this is your dream, too, maybe even inspire you, but never – hopefully – bore you.
Colin Speedie and Louise Johnson
Labels: Boats and Design
A new voice at Attainable Adventure Cruising
posted by John & Phyllis
Web Site
A few weeks ago we got a most thoughtful and clearly written email from a very experienced English cruising sailor named Colin Speedie. Since then we have discussed a variety of issues with Colin via email and have always learned from him. We posted his original communication here.
Colin and his partner Louise Johnson have just embarked on having their dream cruising boat built and have very kindly agreed to share the process with us and our readers in a series of posts on this blog. In addition, since they are from England and are having their new boat built in France, they will bring a European prospective to our blog.
Their choice of boat, while as different from “Morgan’s Cloud” as you could possibly imagine, is a boat that has long interested us. I won’t give anymore away. Welcome Colin and Louise. Look for their first post in the next few days.
Labels: Boats and Design
Yet MORE Anchor Stuff
posted by John & Phyllis
Web Site
[Not surprisingly, our post suggesting that Rocna should not have scaled the results of the SAIL Magazine anchor test got a comment from Craig Smith at Rocna, which we have printed below, together with our response.]
"To compare results from a 32lb anchor directly to those from a 35lb anchor is conceptually little different to Practical Sailor drawing the insightful conclusion in their 1999 testing that the CQR is better than the Delta, because it held 583lbs average vs. the Delta's 496lbs.
The sizes tested? 35lb CQR, 22lb Delta. No, really.
(I'll say the obvious: work out the performance per lb).
The variation of anchor sizes in the sample of contenders chosen by West Marine is most unfortunate. It is also however unavoidable, because it is impossible to find the same size produced by all manufacturers. Variance around a median must be accepted in any real world test.
West Marine have in the past analyzed their results on a ratio of holding power to weight. SAIL in this case have regrettably elected not to.
Your comment John that "if SPADE were recommending an anchor of twice the weight for the test" our correction would be valid immediately conceeds that this adjustment is justified. It would be illogical to argue otherwise, even though the difference is smaller. If it is valid for that extreme, then it is valid for any variance whatsoever. In fact, the variance is about 10% which is in fact quite significant if the results are close.
The fact that the Spade requires a lead tip-weight is one flaw of the Spade which directly affects performance - as seen here. It is no excuse, no more so than the presence of the Rocna's roll-bar would be if the situation were reversed. Indeed, the fact that the Rocna of smaller weight features more surface area than the Spade at no expense of other factors is one of our sales points in advantage.
It would be logical to consider the performance on a surface-area to surface-area basis only if this was an intrinsically important factor. If one cares how much paint is required to turn one's anchor pink, then this may be so. However, weight is typically the definining factor of anchors of the same material, and is most critical on the bow of any boat. It also directly affects cost.
It is more regrettable that SAIL's analysis of their own data leaves much to be desired. In any case, a brief look at West Marine's own comments on the matter may be more appropriate than debating figures. In their current catalog is a table with summary comments of all anchors tested.
On the Spade:
"Somewhat mixed results with three OK pulls, and three maximum pulls. Set immediately each time."
On the Rocna:
"Superb, consistent performance. Held a minimum of 4,500lb and engaged immediately."
Those quotes are verbatim and complete. There I will leave it, unless you John would like a more in depth debate on the matter on your site. I am happy to discuss our analysis of the data, which is intended to be a fairer and more representative picture of the testing data."
Our Response:
I still don’t think it is a good idea for manufacturers to unilaterally change the result of independent tests. The Rocna is a great anchor and I don’t think that it needs this kind of manipulation of the data to sell; in fact I think it may even be detrimental in the long run.
I would also question the implied assertion that holding power to weight is the only valid criterion for anchor evaluation. If this were so, aluminum anchors like those from SPADE and Fortress would be clear winners. (Yes I know that Craig said “anchors of the same material", but that seems a convenient qualification to me.) However, as a long term user of an aluminum Fortress as a kedge I would never suggest that it was a superior all round anchor to a steel SPADE or Rocna. See this post for more some of our thoughts on aluminum anchors.
There are many other factors that make a good anchor including ease of stowing on the bow roller, ability to exhaust rocks from the blade, susceptibility to break out in a wind shift, strength and, most of all, ability to set and hold in many different bottom types.
We know the SPADE is a good anchor and a breakthrough in performance over traditional anchors because we have used it several hundred times in many different bottom types from the Bahamas to Greenland and many places in-between on both sides of the Atlantic; the same places where we used a CQR, Luke and Fortress in the past.
From the anecdotal information we are getting, we suspect that the Rocna would have done as well as the SPADE for us. Who knows, it might even have done better, although it is hard to imagine how since the SPADE has never dragged once set and has only failed to set twice in all that time. However, to use one test, done with a few pulls in three similar locations and scaled by weight, to say that the Rocna is the best anchor is, I think, a leap way too far.
Labels: Anchoring
Comment of the Month
posted by John & Phyllis
Web Site
[We received this email from an obviously very experienced sailor and are publishing it below since we think his thoughts have value, particularly his final conclusion, which we have printed in bold. Colin also corresponded with us about and is engaged in a search in Europe for good quality high tensile anchor chain for his new Ovni. We will be publishing his findings in a later post.]
I've been reading through your excellent site, especially in regards to things that work, and those that don't.
I have worked as a commercial yacht charter skipper and wildlife researcher in the UK since the early nineties, skippering a variety of craft from a traditional sailing trawler down to our current Frers 39 cutter. Most of that time has been spent in the western isles of Scotland, a magnificent but wild cruising ground.
During that time I've used most types of anchor - CQR, Bruce, Danforth, Fisherman etc, all of which, in my view, have their good and bad points. But like yourself, I was most frustrated with the CQR, even though ours was oversize for the boat. In the hard, fine sand of the Isles of Scilly I came the closest I have ever come to losing a boat, when our CQR dragged in 60 knot gusts. Many, many times I cursed the thing when trying to get it to bite in any anchorage where there was weed present.
So when the new generation of anchors came along I was ready to give one a try, and plumped for the Rocna (having seen the video). As there was at that time no importer in the UK, I imported it direct from NZ at great expense, and I have to say it has proved (over the last two seasons) worth every penny. Not only does it set instantly like a car's handbrake and hold like a rock, but, remarkably it does so in such a wide variety of substrates. It really is the best piece of kit I've bought in recent years.
British yachties are very conservative - most of them will not hear a word against the good old CQR. When I wrote a piece on a forum reporting how I found the Rocna, one worthy dismissed me as a plant of the manufacturer - oh dear. But you are absolutely right that most people who sail "outside the box" a little wouldn't have a CQR as a main anchor these days, any more than they would want to fly across the Atlantic in a biplane. I am convinced of one thing - anyone who ever tries one of the new generation of anchors - Spade, Rocna, Manson - will not be going back to their old CQR in a hurry.
Colin
Labels: Anchoring
While talking of Practical Sailor, we have been getting this excellent publication for 20 years or so and highly recommend it. For those of you who are not familiar with the magazine, they test and report on boats and equipment. Since they don’t accept advertising they are not subjected to leverage from manufacturers like most other sailing magazines are. For subscription information see www.practical-sailor.com. Tell them we sent you.
