Interesting Anchor Test
 

One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp

There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp

There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB twice.
LOL.

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp


There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB twice.
LOL.





I thought it was an hysterically funny post, typical of w'hine for
rec.boats. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the article, simply w'hine's
reposting it here.

--
Of life’s simple pleasures, few are more satisfying than being attacked
by the right-wing trash in rec.boats. :)

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/2014 1:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp



There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB twice.
LOL.





I thought it was an hysterically funny post, typical of w'hine for
rec.boats. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the article, simply w'hine's
reposting it here.



Right. How *dare* he submit a boating related post to rec.boats!

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/14 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 1:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp




There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB twice.
LOL.





I thought it was an hysterically funny post, typical of w'hine for
rec.boats. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the article, simply w'hine's
reposting it here.



Right. How *dare* he submit a boating related post to rec.boats!


Nope...that's not it at all.

--
Of life’s simple pleasures, few are more satisfying than being attacked
by the right-wing trash in rec.boats. :)

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/2014 2:13 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 1:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp





There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the
eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB twice.
LOL.





I thought it was an hysterically funny post, typical of w'hine for
rec.boats. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the article, simply w'hine's
reposting it here.



Right. How *dare* he submit a boating related post to rec.boats!


Nope...that's not it at all.



Oh. Was it hysterically funny because Wayne has more experience
underway than the rest of us combined?

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/14 2:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 2:13 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 1:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the
winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp






There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms
that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific
bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine
art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a
soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the
eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB
twice.
LOL.





I thought it was an hysterically funny post, typical of w'hine for
rec.boats. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the article, simply w'hine's
reposting it here.



Right. How *dare* he submit a boating related post to rec.boats!


Nope...that's not it at all.



Oh. Was it hysterically funny because Wayne has more experience
underway than the rest of us combined?



No, though I have no particular reason to believe that claim. Maybe your
old buddy, FlaJim has more experience underway than W'hine. Maybe
someone else does. Have you compared the resumes of the four or five
remaining boaters here?

--
Of life’s simple pleasures, few are more satisfying than being attacked
by the right-wing trash in rec.boats. :)

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/2014 2:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 2:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 2:13 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 1:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the
winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp







There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For
example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for
just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms
that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific
bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy
everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine
art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a
soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay
but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the
eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB
twice.
LOL.





I thought it was an hysterically funny post, typical of w'hine for
rec.boats. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the article, simply
w'hine's
reposting it here.



Right. How *dare* he submit a boating related post to rec.boats!


Nope...that's not it at all.



Oh. Was it hysterically funny because Wayne has more experience
underway than the rest of us combined?



No, though I have no particular reason to believe that claim. Maybe your
old buddy, FlaJim has more experience underway than W'hine. Maybe
someone else does. Have you compared the resumes of the four or five
remaining boaters here?



Sorry. I was thinking recreational boating, not miles sailed on a Navy
or Coast Guard vessel. Yes, of the recreational boaters I'd say it's
safe to say Wayne has more miles under his keel than the rest of us
combined based on his posts and trip logs.

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/14 2:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 2:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 2:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 2:13 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 1:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the
winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp








There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For
example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for
just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms
that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct
consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific
bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy
everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine
art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a
soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay
but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock,
etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over
many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the
eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB
twice.
LOL.





I thought it was an hysterically funny post, typical of w'hine for
rec.boats. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the article, simply
w'hine's
reposting it here.



Right. How *dare* he submit a boating related post to rec.boats!


Nope...that's not it at all.



Oh. Was it hysterically funny because Wayne has more experience
underway than the rest of us combined?



No, though I have no particular reason to believe that claim. Maybe your
old buddy, FlaJim has more experience underway than W'hine. Maybe
someone else does. Have you compared the resumes of the four or five
remaining boaters here?



Sorry. I was thinking recreational boating, not miles sailed on a Navy
or Coast Guard vessel. Yes, of the recreational boaters I'd say it's
safe to say Wayne has more miles under his keel than the rest of us
combined based on his posts and trip logs.


There could be a boater here who is as secretive about his "trip logs"
as your junior high buddy, FlaJim, is about his life.

Regardless, I wouldn't doubt that W'hine has more hours underway making
the same trips over and over than anyone else has, sort of like an
interstate trucker driving coast to coast, except he drives up and down
the ICW and to the islands in the Carib.

Last year, a high school classmate of mine, a fellow whose prior boating
experience was plying the waters of LI Sound in a daysailer, remarried
(he was a widower) and he and his bride spent six months on a 40'
sailboat they chartered going to many ports of call in the Mediterranean
(and docking the boat and going inland), starting in Spain, with
landings in France, Italy, Albania (yikes!) and Greece, and a couple of
others I don't recall. That's a trip I'd love to take to put water under
my keel.

--
Of life’s simple pleasures, few are more satisfying than being attacked
by the right-wing trash in rec.boats. :)

Interesting Anchor Test
 

On 10/24/2014 2:36 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 2:30 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 2:13 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 2:11 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 1:52 PM, F*O*A*D wrote:
On 10/24/14 12:44 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/24/2014 10:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
One thing interesting about this test is that the research vessel
used, the R/V Rachel Carson, was designed by Roger Long, a former
contributor to rec.boats.cruising - Roger is still active on some
other boating forums and is presently cruising south for the
winter on
his sailboat.

http://www.boatus.com/seaworthy/magazine/2014/october/the-fine-art-of-anchoring.asp







There are lots of caveats with a test like this, some of which were
noted at the end of the article:

---------------------------------
But there were some things the tests couldn't measure. For
example, a
straight-line pull test can't predict how well an anchor will reset
during a wind shift. The tests also can't tell the ultimate holding
power of a wellset anchor that's subject to dynamic loads, such as
when wind and waves act on a boat. Finally, the results hold for
just
this one bottom. But there are so many different types of bottoms
that
testing in them all would be an overwhelming undertaking.

No anchor test will ever manage to be complete, and despite all the
caveats, the process was a commendable attempt to conduct consistent
and comparable straight-line holding power tests in a specific
bottom.
While the testing wasn't perfect and won't begin to satisfy
everyone,
it succeeded in adding to the limited body of knowledge that exists
about anchoring and to confirm that anchoring remains as much fine
art
as hard science.
-----------------------------------

The biggest issue for me is that all of the testing was done in a
soft
mud bottom. That's fine for the Solomons area of Chesapeake Bay
but
the most important thing for us is an anchor that sets well in many
different kinds of conditions like sand, grass, loose rock, etc. We
have been using Spade and Rocna anchors for over 10 years, over many
thousands of miles of cruising, and have had excellent results.




Interesting article.

I felt a little bit the novice when reading it though. During the
eight
years I had the Navigator I used the anchor *once* and on the GB
twice.
LOL.





I thought it was an hysterically funny post, typical of w'hine for
rec.boats. Mind you, I'm not making fun of the article, simply
w'hine's
reposting it here.



Right. How *dare* he submit a boating related post to rec.boats!


Nope...that's not it at all.



Oh. Was it hysterically funny because Wayne has more experience
underway than the rest of us combined?



No, though I have no particular reason to believe that claim. Maybe your
old buddy, FlaJim has more experience underway than W'hine. Maybe
someone else does. Have you compared the resumes of the four or five
remaining boaters here?


Your tin hat is squeezing your brain too tight. Other than your bud Don,
who has less boating experience than you?