Page 3 of 190 FirstFirst 1234567891011121353103 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 1895
  1. #21
    Scotty_Tradewind's Avatar
    Scotty_Tradewind is offline Registered User
    Location : Me: South Oxfordshire. Boat: Portsmouth harbour, Wicormarine
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,626

    Default

    If this below is to be believed to be an official posting from a true Rocna company representative, why the mystique of not using your name?
    It makes me doubt the integrity of such a posting!

    I shall be phoning retailers Piplars of Poole wishing to change my Rocna 15kg to an anchor having correct steel specifiactions today. I'll report back.


    Quote Originally Posted by RocnaONE View Post
    Just a bit of background for everyone.

    Under contract, I am helping Rocna via the new owners CMP, with some practical advice on restoring the brand's reputation - which has been under a bit of cloud recently.

    I knew the press release might stir up a debate again, so some time ago I approached the YBW web manager for permission to enter the lists if needed. This permission, under certain pragmatic conditions, was granted, and the opportunity is much appreciated.

    Some ground rules first;
    CMP is a company with a strong ethical background with a passion for high standards. Have a look at the website page, for a flavour.

    http://www.canmet.com/content/aboutus/quality.htm

    As part of that approach CMP will not be engaging in rough housing, name-calling, or astroturfing. We are concentrating on

    • sorting out the Q420 reduced spec steel problem
    • identifying and replacing when requested any 420 anchor
    • building up the quality controls which Rocna had properly implemented in the production factory early last year
    • strengthening the supply chain management
    • rebuilding the website, and ensuring that it is always accurate and timely
    • working with our distributors and sales points to provide full technical information to customers
    • providing a source of clear and accurate information to the yachting press
    • joining in the relentless forum debates on anchors, with dignity and useful data


    We have been actively engaged in providing backup information to Laura, and to the various IPC yachting mag editors, and this will continue apace over the next few days.

    There will Technical Bulletins on the steel issue, with information to clear up confusions about bending, ultimate tensile strength, deformation, breaking strain, etc. We hope these will enable owners and prospective purchasers to understand that the strength of Rocna anchors is not only from the steel used, but also from the advanced and effective design, proven by many deep sea cruising sailors all over the world - and for example in the recent hurricane in Vlikho, where a Rocna 33 held a 52 ft heavy steel ketch firm, in recorded winds of 91 knots.

    The steel issue is being dealt with. We are looking at a testing process using various advanced systems to see if any anchor presented is a 420 steel one, or the 'standard' Q620. By the way, Q is an acronym in Chinese for Yield Point. (There's a nice little question for the next yacht club quiz night ).


    So there we have it.

    What went wrong:
    We should have sorted production issues out earlier and more proactively.
    Article authors could have approached Rocna directly for information, but didn't.
    We should have picked up on wrong or tendentious information being put out on social media



    What we are doing:-
    We are working very very hard to put everything right as quickly as possible.
    We will update the website as soon as we can.
    We will work with our customers, and the design and technical teams, and our distributors, to identify any anchors which do not meet spec.
    We will offer to replace them if owners are not happy to continue using them when they see the results of the lab tests (due out this weekend).
    We will build Rocnas with the best and most appropriate materials we can find.
    We will answer questions as fast as we can (bearing in mind that Rocna is now working in three different times zones round the world, and even techies have to sleep sometimes !)


    OK, that's all for now from me, folks. Go ahead and post; I'll join in as and when I think it necessary. And thanks again to YBW for the opportunity to do so.

    R1
    You never get to where you want to go if you only travel on sunny days.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,629

    Smile

    Hi longJohn.Hope you've had some good travels.

    Please tell Jeff that the quality of coffee and refreshments available to potential rescuers has been raised, in anticipation!

    And nope I still don't have dive gear onboard yet.....

    Have to say, this weeks weather ranks up there with St Agnes but the beer isn't quite there. Thsts an also YET...
    Why argue with a nautical wall? I just read the graffiti these days.

  3. #23

    Default returned anchors

    As TK has been told privately, all returned anchors identified as made with Q420 shanks will be taken out of use - and probably sent back to China for melting down into battleships: an ironical end.

    And as a point of clarification for the conspiracy theorists, RocnaONE is not Craig Smith.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scotty_Tradewind View Post
    I shall be phoning retailers Piplars of Poole wishing to change my Rocna 15kg to an anchor having correct steel specifiactions today. I'll report back.
    The bit about the 33kg Rocna feels like deja-vu as I also picked up on that the other day. http://www.ybw.com/forums/showthread.php?t=288450

    Interested to see how you get on with Piplers as if any Rocna-swaps are in the offing I might as well take the safest course of action and follow your lead!

    Richard

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    215

    Default

    Just to clarify, I have personally spoken with member RocnaONE and I can assure you they are not Craig Smith.

    We have given this user access to the forums in order to let Rocna respond to posts about their anchors.

    I hope you find it a useful way of understanding more about this.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RocnaONE View Post
    As TK has been told privately, all returned anchors identified as made with Q420 shanks will be taken out of use - and probably sent back to China for melting down into battleships: an ironical end.

    And as a point of clarification for the conspiracy theorists, RocnaONE is not Craig Smith.
    That is very reassuring but is there any way we can identify this Q420 before we return the anchor?

    Richard

  7. #27

    Default

    The question of identifying the Q420 anchors prior to bringing them in, has caused much head-scratching.

    There is no practical test (and we have considered portable X-ray diffusion machines, Brinell hardness testers, rebound testers, deflection tests) to identify a 420 shank.

    We have narrowed down the production schedule and delivery dates to the UK, and if you contact your dealer or distributor they will be able to identify the Q rating from that data.

    One poster has already contacted Piplers this morning, and his anchor has been identified as a 620.


    If anyone has a practical suggestion to identify 420 steel while the anchor is on the boat, we would be very happy to investigate it.

  8. #28
    Scotty_Tradewind's Avatar
    Scotty_Tradewind is offline Registered User
    Location : Me: South Oxfordshire. Boat: Portsmouth harbour, Wicormarine
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,626

    Default

    I have had a talk with the representative of Piplars and two PM's from R1
    (i'm still not convinced as to the necessity for R1's anonymity??)

    I have been given a very lengthy and detailed explanation of the situation and had it confirmed that my 15kg was made from Q620D steel in the area of concern and been assured that this should have qualities of 730-840mpa whereas the design spec' for bissalloy was 800mpa.

    I will not try to give further explanation of my discussions because as a layman in terms of metallurgy, I'm liable to make errors and misquote, if I've not already done so.
    I am told that a full explanation will be made from the new owners shortly.

    I have no other associations with Rocna other than having been a satisfied customer in the past.
    I have not used my 15kg Rocna yet, but I'm convinced from using my 10kg anchor that it will do the job well.
    Last edited by Scotty_Tradewind; 29-09-11 at 11:14. Reason: typo
    You never get to where you want to go if you only travel on sunny days.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    215

    Default

    For everyone who is interested, I've just updated the http://www.ybw.com/news/rocna-anchor...ic/529811?cccc story online after speaking with RocnaONE over the phone.
    http://www.ybw.com/news/rocna-anchor...ic/529811?cccc

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Scotty_Tradewind View Post
    I have had a talk with the representative of Piplars and two PM's from R1
    I am also in contact with R1 who is demonstrating commendable pro-active customer service.

    With the benefit of hindsight, it's a shame that Rocna did not adopt this approach when the issue originally arose - it might have given rise to some earlier replacement costs but I suspect that the kudos gained by taking pro-active action would have resulted in a lesser impact on the business overall as, in my opinion, the Rocna design itself is one of the very best!

    Richard

Page 3 of 190 FirstFirst 1234567891011121353103 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •