Skip Gundlach wrote:
....
Well, apparently several reasons. None are particularly
important; I presume it to be that I misread a fouled anchor,
when, instead, it was a lousy mud bottom which had done me in on
the first pull. Not having sampled the bottom directly, but only
by apparent set, I didn't know the nature of it as being -
apparently, in hindsight - the same lousy stuff we abandoned on
the other side of the channel when we first started on our time
in Oxford, when we didn't set well, and I did, indeed, do the bottom
sample, albeit with a 55# Delta.

Duh! What a coincidence - soft mud in two different parts of the
Chesapeake! What are the odds of that?

'''

I can't find anything by him. However, in the book of the same name
by Hinz, the author suggests sampling only a very small portion of
only the surface. If you thought that duck consisted of a few inch
circle of feathers, you'd be missing a pretty good meal, but that's
what you'd get with his soap, grease or other sticky to pull up
something from the bottom. I'll take a core sample or at least a foot
or so of some other means, thanks.

Ah! Hinz is an incompetent bozo because he doesn't advise taking many
core samples to figure out there's mud in the Chesapeake.

No, you're correct that I didn't
do that in my second anchoring location; had I, I might have anchored
differently. My bad. But then, again, I've never been shy about
admitting those, have I?
For god sakes man. Just go to a book store and order it ! ! !
or go
on line and order it

Already read it. Well, already read what I presume you intended
me to read, not something by a nonexistent Hintz. Interesting
reading and I see that it's where you got all your questions.
Now that I know how to find the means to calculate, perhaps I'll
do that. Other than the minutiae of calculation, I didn't see
anything in the book which was new information to me;

Yes, it's clear you have the anchoring thing down pat now.

I did see lots
of old data/equipment and not the first word about third generation
anchors which are available today...

Skip, this has to rank amongst the dumbest things you've said here.
Perhaps you can enlighten us as to how these "third generation anchors"
have made Hinz's work obsolete.


Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going back to my movie.

The time would be better spent reading a good book on anchoring. I
suggest Hinz.

On Oct 27, 2:41 pm, Skip Gundlach wrote:
... I wasn't able to find any author by that name. However, I have,
now, read a 21-year-old text by that name and which had Earl
Hinz, as I offered in my reply before, as the author. ...

Earl R Hinz is one of my heroes. He is an extraordinarily talented
writer and researcher and has produced the seminal books on cruising
in Oceania based on his own trailblazing travels. You may disagree
with him, and there are a few thoughts of his that I take issue with,
but he deserves more than an ordinary amount of respect. The last
edition of _The Complete Book of Anchoring and Mooring_ came out in
2001. I have an older edition and I don't know if the new one
mentions the newer anchors but even if it doesn't the fundamentals
haven't been changed by them. I've been using a Spade for a few years
now and it is a good anchor, but it is used in the same way as the
Delta from which it was evolved. Not that anyone can learn to anchor
by reading books alone, but the Hinz book on anchoring is worth a read
and his articles and books on Pacific cruising are very good, indeed.
Of course, I think Bob is being silly, but I hope that won't put you
off Hinz.

On a more or less unrelated topic, I use my GPS for anchor watch all
the time. I've got a Furuno GP-31 and it has a simple graphic page
that displays a "bread crumb" trail. I find that I can see where I
dropped the anchor on that screen and put a goto point there. The
anchor watch alarm is then set to go off if I go outside a circle
around that point. While we sit at anchor the gps continues drawing
the track on the screen and pretty soon a thick arc is drawn. This
makes it very easy to see if we are dragging even if it is pitch black
and raining as it so often is when a front passes by in the night...

-- Tom.

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 06:47:01 -0000, Bob wrote:


Please supply the following data;

1) what is the weight of your boat?

2) How much DRAG (pull on your ground tackle) does your boat create
in the following winds

15 knots _________ pounds

30 knots _________ pounds

42 knots _________ pounds

60 knots_________ pounds
...
Bob


You must be joking? This is the sort of questionnaire
that an engineer might address. I will tell you for free, that the
rec.boats.cruising participation group is not largely comprised
of engineers.
You have this data for your boat, I expect.
Accurate to +- 5% I expect?

Brian Whatcott Altus OK
p.s. Drag is determined by a whole bunch more factors than
wind speed, dude.

On Oct 27, 6:16 am, Brian Whatcott wrote:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 06:47:01 -0000, Bob wrote:
Please supply the following data;

1) what is the weight of your boat?

2) How much DRAG (pull on your ground tackle) does your boat create
in the following winds

15 knots _________ pounds

30 knots _________ pounds

42 knots _________ pounds

60 knots_________ pounds
..
Bob


You must be joking? This is the sort of questionnaire
that an engineer might address. I will tell you for free, that the
rec.boats.cruising participation group is not largely comprised
of engineers.
You have this data for your boat, I expect.
Accurate to +- 5% I expect?

Brian Whatcott Altus OK
p.s. Drag is determined by a whole bunch more factors than
wind speed, dude.- Hide quoted text -



Hi Brian:

No Joke intended here. And in all sincerity I don't believe my
questions are beyond anyone that lingers here. Like I said, It aint
rocket science. The biggest problem I see here is a total lack of
ability/desire to learn................

There are those who say theyve anchored 400 times/year all over the
place and bla bla bla
or
its beyond our ability to learn cause we aint engineers.
or
Uhh, duhh I dont know... weve drug a few times without any problmes

So once a gain I will say that operating a boat does has a prereq
skill set.

You have this data for your boat, I expect.
Accurate to +- 5% I expect?

To answer your question Brian...... Yes I do have that info. Im not an
engineer, just a average joe who doesnt have enough money to risk my
home getting carried to the rocks. Ill tell ya a little secret.......
I read it in a book. A book an engineer wrote so I didnt have to do
the math. THere are some very smart people out there all willing to
help. So I read and take their advice. The BIGGEST problem with that
is any idiot can get $500 bucks for an article in Sailing or Cruising
World. The real challenge is which source to believe.

So as I said to Skip I will also say to you. Please read the text
titled:

"The Complete Book of Anchoring and Mooring", by Earl Hintz,
He has another titled " Sea Anchors and Drogues" Get that one too.

Once you read both then lets talk..................

PS, Agreed there are several factors, when put together, keep a boat
put..... dude.
But figured that was beyond Skips ability to understand at this
point.

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 11:16:29 -0700, Bob wrote:


2) How much DRAG (pull on your ground tackle) does your boat create
in the following winds
....
You must be joking? This is the sort of questionnaire
that an engineer might address.
....
Hi Brian:

No Joke intended here. And in all sincerity I don't believe my
questions are beyond anyone that lingers here.

Wow! An anwer in a tone so civil that its credibility
jumps 5 points immediately.
Thanks

Brian W

"Brian Whatcott" wrote
a tone so civil

Did you catch the PS at the end? I sometimes wonder if the people who post
evangelical "you must do as I say or you're a vile menace" rants are such
confrontational jerks in person. I hope not. Bob may be a treasure trove of
anchor wisdom for all I know, but when he comes off as just another troll
with a hard-on for Skip, the credibility meter takes a dip.

As to a GPS anchor watch I note these two incidents:

A couple of years ago my wife and I took a walk down an old power line
that was over grown but had a trail. I took my pocket GPS with me and
logged the track. The outgoing and return tracks were off by at least
150 yards in places. Not big jumps but just gradually wandering off.
As I was walking a very narrow path through otherwise dense forest I
know I was traveling the exact same path.

A couple of days later I unintentionally left the GPS plugged into my
car overnight with the track turned on. The next morning I had a
"scatter plot" for my track covering a couple of hundred yards.

The GPS (Magellan) has AIS and has been dead accurate in every other
instance. I use it to find deer stands in the dark when hunting - going
out in the morning before sunrise.

The point is that GPS SYSTEM, though phenomenally accurate MOST of the
time can fail SOME of the time. I have thought of this when using the
anchor alarm. I might be dragging or the GPS SYSTEM might be brain farting.

A final point, oft made by Nigel Calder, not all charts are normalized
to the same datum. For example, through first hand experience, and as
noted on the charts, the South coast of Newfoundland charts Lat/Lon can
vary by as much as 1/2 mile from the GPS position. It is not a simple
conversion factor, the CGS does not know what the origional datum was.
It baffles me how the CGS allows this to continue but it does.

If you are interested I took a picture of my plotter which I posted here.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/sho...os/browse/bd9e


Howard

The point is that GPS SYSTEM, though phenomenally accurate MOST of the
time can fail SOME of the time.

More likely your unit wasn't picking up enough satellites. This is not the
fault of the GPS system. Some older units didn't do a very good job of
pickup up sats when there's overhead leaf canopy (some still don't). Don't
blame the system for inferior equipment.

An anchor watch in open water, without high terrain or foliage nearby, will
likely be very consistent in it's location.

If you are interested I took a picture of my plotter which I posted here.
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/sho...os/browse/bd9e

Which is a useless link unless someone joins that group. Try using a free
service like flickr instead of forcing people to join (and presumably then
leave) a group.

Bill Kearney wrote:
The point is that GPS SYSTEM, though phenomenally accurate MOST of the
time can fail SOME of the time.

More likely your unit wasn't picking up enough satellites. This is not the
fault of the GPS system. Some older units didn't do a very good job of
pickup up sats when there's overhead leaf canopy (some still don't). Don't
blame the system for inferior equipment.

An anchor watch in open water, without high terrain or foliage nearby, will
likely be very consistent in it's location.

If you are interested I took a picture of my plotter which I posted here.
http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/sho...os/browse/bd9e

Which is a useless link unless someone joins that group. Try using a free
service like flickr instead of forcing people to join (and presumably then
leave) a group.


You may well be correct that I was not picking up enough satellites.
Although in this particular case there was not much overhead canopy,
just a bunch of stunted (but dense) fir trees on either side.

As I recall the number of satellites varies, some times more, some times
fewer. And if the antenna does not have a clear view of the sky it may
be off. I believe it is also possible for a reflection to cause an
error, though probably not much of a problem unless you are in Miami.

Still I take your point, lack of signal was the likely cause.

Also, I said AIS when I meant to say WAAS - oops.

No intent to make you join a useless group.

Try http://s23.photobucket.com/albums/b384/hpeer/ if interested.

I think that should work.

Howard

In article ,
says...
As to a GPS anchor watch I note these two incidents:

A couple of years ago my wife and I took a walk down an old power line
that was over grown but had a trail. I took my pocket GPS with me and
logged the track. The outgoing and return tracks were off by at least
150 yards in places. Not big jumps but just gradually wandering off.
As I was walking a very narrow path through otherwise dense forest I
know I was traveling the exact same path.

You've stated the problem pretty well: "very narrow path through
otherwise dense forest". GPS signals don't penetrate
well through dense forest canopies.

A couple of days later I unintentionally left the GPS plugged into my
car overnight with the track turned on. The next morning I had a
"scatter plot" for my track covering a couple of hundred yards.
Was the GPS inside the car, or did the antenna have a clear view
of the whole sky? If the only clear signals were coming in
through the windshield, it was probably only using 2 or
three satellites to obtain a fix.

With many of my GPS logger projects, I regularly see about 5 meters
drift in elevation but only 2 to 3 meters of horizontal drift.
Of course that stability only applies in the continental US, where
the WAAS corrections are effective.

The GPS (Magellan) has AIS and has been dead accurate in every other
instance. I use it to find deer stands in the dark when hunting - going
out in the morning before sunrise.

The point is that GPS SYSTEM, though phenomenally accurate MOST of the
time can fail SOME of the time. I have thought of this when using the
anchor alarm. I might be dragging or the GPS SYSTEM might be brain farting.

I think that if your GPS does not have a well-placed antenna, you will
often end up in situations where it is receiving signals from only
two or three satellites. When that happens, the horizontal dilution
of precision can increase drastically.

A final point, oft made by Nigel Calder, not all charts are normalized
to the same datum. For example, through first hand experience, and as
noted on the charts, the South coast of Newfoundland charts Lat/Lon can
vary by as much as 1/2 mile from the GPS position. It is not a simple
conversion factor, the CGS does not know what the origional datum was.
It baffles me how the CGS allows this to continue but it does.

If you are interested I took a picture of my plotter which I posted here.

http://ph.groups.yahoo.com/group/sho...os/browse/bd9e


Mark Borgerson