Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678910111213 LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 124
  1. #81
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    19,408

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zing View Post
    Look at their tables. A step up corresponds with nearly double the displacement weight. I am not part of a conspiracy to deceive.
    Anchoring loads are only tenuously connected to displacement.
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    19,408

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neeves View Post
    I have said, many times, they require skill and patience to set - and some obviously had, or developed that skill.
    I have never had any problems getting mine to set, but I bought a slightly bigger one than I had because I think it probably digs in a bit faster. I don't do any of the thrashing around in reverse business, because I think that gentle loading, at least initially, does the job better.

    That said, I have only once anchored in haste, when my engine failed outside the marina entrance in wild gusting (F8+) weather. The smaller CQR I had then set instantly and held rock solid until a workboat came out to get me. Thank goodness.
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    19,408

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zing View Post
    I'm talking about double displacement, not anchor, though it is nearly double too. Round figures, note. Please let's not quibble.
    However, going up one size in anchor is normally only about 20% in anchor weight (feel free to insert the relevant figures) for your anchor, which means, if you're lucky, at most 20% extra holding power. It's interesting that most manufacturers reckon that extra 20% to be good for 100% for displacement ...
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    19,408

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zing View Post
    JRM needs men like you in his office. Apply for a job.
    That's a bright idea. As bright as a 341BTU/hour light bulb!
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

  5. #85
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Returned to South Coast from West Coast of Scotland.
    Posts
    1,773

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    If anyone wants my 45lb CQR for free they can have it.........That's my view of CQR anchors.

    Seriously, it is sitting in the shed and will never be used again by me.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    East coast UK. Mostly. Sometimes the Philippines
    Posts
    9,393

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Where is it?

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    France
    Posts
    25,185

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poignard View Post
    Nobody but a fool would risk losing his boat and possibly his and other's lives by using an unsafe anchor.

    The CQR anchor was patented in the 1930s.

    The great number of them still being used demonstrates that it It has been a very successful anchor.

    If it had not been, you would not see so many of them in use around the world, since there are many readily available and competitively priced alternatives on the market.

    It may well be that better anchors have been invented since the CQR first came on the market more than 80 years ago.

    That does not mean that the CQR has suddenly become useless, anymore than the emergence of a new mobile phone immediately renders its predecessors useless.

    The CQR was Eric Hiscock's choice of anchor.

    If it was good enough for him, it's good enough for me.

    I chose CQR anchors for the three boats I have owned.

    I have never had any reason to regret doing so.
    The CQR :

    Some observations from French tests (paraphrased)

    The overall results were so poor in relation to the other anchors that we did not bother including it in the summary.

    If the boat swings the anchor often falls on its side and the weight of the hinge prevents it from resetting.

    Worst performance ; highest price.

    My presonal choice wold be Spade which consistently comes out top in comparative boat tests. It's a bit more expensive but what is a couple of hundred quid compared with the value of your boat?

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia.
    Posts
    5,277

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by GHA View Post


    Cruise long enough and I suspect a lot of people will eventually take onboard that your capacity to predict the future or have any significant control over a lot of the day to day future can be limited. So shoving the odds a bit more in your favour when it all goes a bit crazy in the anchorage is very much a *good thing* !! If buying a new anchor then going a bit bigger just seems so obvious with no downside other than a few quid.

    Strange that a few get so annoyed about this.......
    You forget - one of the major proponents of the big anchor philosophy is actually using a 68kg anchor where for that size of vessel Rocna suggest 33kg (the next size up Rocna would be 40kg).

    So a, decent, 15kg anchor produces a hold of 2,000kg in decent sand - so on Noelex calculation his anchor will produce well in excess of 8,000kg of hold. He shows a lot of confidence in his anchor - its never be tested at all (which seems a bit of a contradiction - using an untested anchor and suggesting he knows what he is doing???). I love to know how that will develop (and whether the rest of the kit being used has been upsized accordingly - as it, chain, shackle, chain lock etc should have been chosen with the same (or similar) safety factors in mind. It would be interesting to know what safety factors were used 2:1, 4:1.

    Where exactly do you stop when upsizing - and why.

    You, GHA, also have not quite explained, if at all, why when you decided to upsize your 'almost flawless' Rocna you swapped to a Spade. You never mentioned what the flawed part of the Rocna was that prompted the change (it must have been significant to invest in an expensive Spade) - was it really just weight (and if so - how did you know). I'm not quite sure how (or why) you attribute the better safety you apparently have to the extra weight and not the different design. If it was simply the weight issue why not replace the small Rocna and not a bigger one. Maybe this is your idea of a 'technical investigation'. Excuse me if I'm a bit mystified and wonder how you can disparagingly reject some conclusions when your conclusions themselves lack any basis - for the reader to peruse.

    Like Noelex - I expect you to dodge the questions.

    Jonathan
    Last edited by Neeves; 08-08-19 at 23:48.

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Sydney, Australia.
    Posts
    5,277

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zing View Post
    I’m learning some nautical terms here like a Thames ton, which I was able to look up, but what does a cat weigh?
    As Zoidberg recalls, almost, correctly 7t. Thats cruising weight, 400kg of water 200kg of fuel, food, 2 crew and the extra kit we carry Liferaft (for one). Dry weight is 6t. 38' x 22'6" beam 2 x 20hp engines (and the windage of a 45' Bav). And we draw 1m (mini keels)

    Also as Zoidberg recalls we use 6mm chain and alloy anchors (8kgs each, 4 in total) - but equiv to 15kg steel models - saving a bit there and we would try not to actually have all that water - we have a desal unit. And picking up on a point Minn made - our chain is stored just forward of the mast (along with the windlass and 'extra' anchors)The batterie bank is just behind the mast, centralising weight and ensuring a short cable run to the windlass) the bower is on a bow roller about 2m aft of the bows and yes we use 30m snubbers) another nice mix of metric and imperial (weights are metric).

    Blame boat builders for 'imperial' why - even the French define many, most of their yachts with imperial length measurements. And marine diesels are also designated with HP - bizarre.

    Jonathan
    Last edited by Neeves; 08-08-19 at 23:23.

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    SW Scotland
    Posts
    19,408

    Default Re: Deliberately starting an anchor thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neeves View Post
    Blame boat builders for 'imperial' why - even the French define many, most of their yachts with imperial length measurements. And marine diesels are also designated with HP - bizarre.
    I think it's because there is a natural human tendency to prefer bigger numbers: there are more feet than metres and more HP than kW.
    "Seamen are always wanting to do things the proper way; and I like to do them my way."

Page 9 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678910111213 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
  •  

Latest YBW News

Find Boats For Sale

to
to